core of PIL: jurisdiction: Brussel I recast regulation Flashcards
Brussel I recast Regulation
jurisdiction for civil and commercial matters in courts of the EU MS subject to Brussel I recast regulation = regulation 1215/2012
synoniemen: brussel I regulation, judgments regulation, EEX regulation by amending= brussel I bis: Brussel I Recast
voorganger van recast = 44/2001 dus 2001 en 2012
prof brussel I regulation= 44/2001 en brussel I recast = 1215/2012
voorganger van brussel I 44/2001 is brussle I van 1968 also known ass EEX convention maar geen travax preparatoires! gebruiken REPORTS prepared by officials , or agents of European institutions with help from academics = interpretative source (non union instruments)
lugano conventions 1988 en 2007
been developed in parallel first with EEX convention and than Brussel I
apply between EU and most MS of the European free trade association
pas op !! denmark, UK en ireland specific position – fairly inflexible opt-out voor denmark en flexible opt in voor UK en ireland
lugano = ijsland, zwitserland en noorwegen
UK + ierland = opt out
denmark = opt in
overriding principle of Brussel I = Mutual trust
= case Gasser & turner
brussel convention is based on trust between the contracting parties acoord to each others legal system and judicial institutions
mutual trust grows between member states of a class, confident of each others capabilities but mutual trust of courtfor PIL had been imposed Top-Down bv strict lis alibi pendens rule of article 29 brussel I recast (obliging courts seized last to give way to those seized first) had made courts keep a rather beady eye on their counterparts in the other MS– it has also often made them unconfident in their own application of the regime daarom sijging van prliminary questions
brussel I regulation take precedence over national law, including procedural law – national court moet dus eerst bepalen of ze al dan neit wel bevoegd is volgens regulation
mutual trust! !gasser en turner
scope of application : Brussel I
the Subject-matter
article I recast regulation: applies to civil and commercial matters! whatever the nature of the court or tribunal maar uitsluiting van arbitration!! veel discussie geweest zeker in relatie van B2B ipb B2C.
arbitration is exempt on basis of its already covered by 1958 New york convention
autonomous interpretation of terminalogy in regulation case Rutten
court will interpret convention autonomously so to ensure that its fully effective having regard the obligations in article 220 EEC treaty – zo ook ensuring uniform application of the convention
civil and commercial?
autonomous european meaning!
onderscheid tss civil and commercial enerzijds en public law anderzijds – is in civil landen heel straight forward maar is moeilijker dan je denkt als je ook adm rehct erbij neemt
case eurocontrol convention applies to disputes between a public authority and a private individual where the former (OH) has NOT acted in the exercise of its public powers! – the specific legal obligation which lies at the foundation of the claim determines teh aplicability
litigations in environmental matters is current example of how things are in a grey zone private enforcement and public law ( = SCHLOSSER REPORT)
eurocontrol acte imperii
scope of brussel I: civil and commercial matters geen PUBLIEK RECHt maar grens is vaag. eurocontrol zegt acte imperri kan enkel geschil tss OH en particulier als OH niet handelt als publikerechtellijke overheid ging in case over recovery van costs
eurocontrol zegt : autonomous meaning - scope van artivcle brussel I en acte imperii toepassleijkheid als OH handelt
scope of application: ratione personae
brussel I regulation!! changed in recast
brussel I regulation applicable in three cases:
1) defendant in the legal proceeding is domiciled in a MS– nationality is irrelevant - as is the nationality abd domicile of plaintiff
2) a court in a MS had exclusive jurisdiction on basis of one of the grounds listed in article 22 (now 24) whatever the domicile of the parties
3) at least one of the parties (which could be the plaintiff) was domiciled in one of the MS AND a valid choice of formu clause wazs made in accordance with article 23 (now 25).
ratione personae nu in recast!
eerste en tweede veranderd! domicile of the defendants is no longer required for consumer or employment contracts!!
and choice of court neither party need to be domiciled in the EU!!
dus nu is het
1) defendant in legal proceeding needs to be domiciled in MS except for consumer or employments OK + irrelevant of nationalities of parties
2) court in MS on exclusive jurisdiction listed in 22 (24) whatever the domicile is
3) No domicile required!! only valid choice of court/formu clause in accordance with 23 (25).
domicile of eprson/ legal person
natural person article 62: laws of the MS determine wheter person is domiciled
article 63 encourages harmonisation for the application of domicile for legal persons by three possible locations!
1) statutory seat( term not known in elglish/irish law - refers to registred office/place of incorporation)
2) central administration
3) principle place of business
given an autonomous meaning
jurisdictional rules of regulation
decending order of exclusivity and specifity= most specific and exclusive firts MATRIX
1) exclusive J. regardless domicile article 24
2) jurisdiction by appearance 26
3) insurance, consumer, employment Ok 10-23
4) agreements on jurisdiction: 25
5) general jurisdiction: defendants domicile 4
6) special jurisdiction- defendant domiciled in another Ms 7-9
7) residual jurisd. defendant not domiciled in MS 6
8) loss of jurisdiction: lis alibi pendens + related actions 29-32
9) applications for provisoinal or protective measures 35
