Impediments of National Procedural Law to the Free Movement of Judgments
Luxembourg Report on European Procedural Law Volume I
Zusammenfassung
Hess/Ortolani
Impediments of National Procedural Law the Free Movement of Judgments
This volume presents a comparative examination and empirical evaluation of national procedural rules and practices, and further assesses the key procedural problems that impact mutual trust and the free movement of judgments in light of national and European Court of Justice case law. It provides an exhaustive overview of the similarities and differences of civil procedure in all EU Member States, and their impact on the recognition and enforcement of judgments.
Alongside The Luxembourg Report on European Procedural Law, Volume II: Implementing EU Consumer Rights by National Procedural Law, this volume offers the most comprehensive, empirically driven comparative investigation of national civil procedure thus far undertaken in Europe. Using an extensive dataset comprising hundreds of interviews and responses to a multi-language online survey, it examines the rules of civil procedure in all EU Member States and identifies their impact on mutual trust and the free movement of judgments.
This volume will be of interest for all practitioners, academics and policymakers with a focus on judicial cooperation and civil justice and will facilitate a better understanding of the impact of national procedural laws on cross-border dispute resolution in Europe.
- Kapitel Ausklappen | EinklappenSeiten
- I–XIV Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis I–XIV
- 1–4 Foreword 1–4
- 5–88 Chapter 1. A Classic Cross-border Case: the Usual Situation in the First Instance (Fernando Gascón Inchausti and Marta Requejo Isidro) 5–88
- A. Declaratory Stage of the Action
- I. Research Approach, Conclusions and Proposals
- 1. Standpoint
- 2. General findings
- 3. Policy options and proposals
- II. The National Rules on Competence in Cross-border Cases (e. g. is there a specialized judge in cross-border situations?)
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- III. The Cross-border Service of the Lawsuit
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- IV. Legal Aid
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- V. The Language of the Proceedings
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- VI. The Rules on Representation before the Court
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- VII. Scheduling of the Proceedings and Setting of Time Limits
- 1. Status quo: Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- VIII. The Cross-border Taking of Evidence (including problems related to the translation of documents or interpretation during court hearings)
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- IX. Confidentiality Requirements in Court Proceedings
- 1. Status quo: Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/possible improvements
- X. Motivation/reasoning of the Judgment
- 1. Summary: Status quo
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- XI. The Decision on Costs
- 1. Status quo: Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- 4. Addenda: court fees
- B. Divergence at the Enforcement Stage
- I. Approach of Research. Conclusions and Proposals
- 1. Standpoint
- 2. General findings
- 2. Policy options and proposals
- II. Enforcement Proceedings
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/Possible improvements
- III. The Interface of Brussels I bis Regulation/National Systems
- 1. Status quo. Summary
- 2. Problems and assessment
- 3. Proposals/possible improvements
- 89–130 Chapter 2. Default Procedures and Judgments in Cross-border Settings (Paul Oberhammer, Florian Scholz, Katharina Auernig and Julius Schumann) 89–130
- A. Introduction to the Chapter
- B. The Perspective of the Member State of Origin
- I. The Cross-border Service of the Lawsuit
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- 3. Proposals and Improvements
- II. The Translation of Judicial Documents
- III. The Rules on Representation Before the Court
- 1. Status quo, summary
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- IV. Failure of a Defendant to Enter an Appearance and Declaration of Default by the Court
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- 3. Proposals and Improvements
- V. The Assessment (on Jurisdiction and/or on the Merits) Undertaken by the Judge in case the Defendant does not Enter an Appearance
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- VI. Specific Situations where a Defendant will not be Permitted to Defend Himself although he is Present/Aware of the Case (i. e. contempt of court or debarment from defending)
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- 3. Proposals and Improvements
- VII. Procedures to Oppose the Judgment in the Member State of Origin besides the Appeal
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- 3. Proposals and Improvements
- VIII. In Case a Defendant is Unable to Introduce his Recourse within the Time-limit, what Circumstances Allow Him to Introduce his Recourse outside of this Time-limit
- 1. Status quo
- 2. Problems and Assessment
- 3. Proposals and Improvements
- C. Perspective of the State of Enforcement
- I. Summary of Case Law on Grounds of Non-Recognition
- 1. Lack of service of the document initiating the proceedings
- 2. Service to the wrong place
- 3. Notification via public announcement
- 4. Proof of service
- 5. Translation requirements
- 6. Sufficient time period for defence
- 7. Lack of service of other documents
- 8. Possibility to challenge the default judgment
- 9. Other issues:
- II. Problems Pointed Out by Participants in the Online Survey
- III. Interview Results
- IV. Proposals and Improvements
- 131–162 Chapter 3. Provisional Measures (Gilles Cuniberti and Eva Storskrubb) 131–162
- A. Arrest/Provisional Attachment
- I. Summary
- 1. Regulation (EU) No 655/2014
- 2. Availability and Grounds for Provisional Attachment
- 3. Ex Parte Relief and Safeguards
- 4. Additional Procedural Divergences
- II. Problems and Assessment
- III. Proposals and Improvements
- B. Provisional Payment
- I. Summary
- 1. Improving the Efficiency of the Judicial System
- 2. Providing Financial Support to Impecunious Creditors
- 3. Favouring certain categories of parties
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. Availability of Provisional Payment
- 2. Jurisdiction to Grant Provisional Payment under EU Regulations
- III. Proposals and Improvements
- C. Preservation of Evidence
- I. Summary
- 1. Remedies
- 2. Requirements and procedure
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. The Recognition of Reports Established in other Member States
- 2. Jurisdiction to appoint judicial experts
- 3. Extra-territorial preservation orders
- III. Proposals and Improvements
- 163–206 Chapter 4. Appeal and Third Instance (Christoph Kern and Karol Weitz) 163–206
- A. First Appeal (Second Instance)
- I. General Assessment of Appellate Proceedings
- 1. Parties
- 2. Substantive jurisdiction regarding where to lodge the notice of appeal and the particulars of the appeal
- 3. Content of the notice of appeal or particulars of appeal
- 4. Leave to appeal or certain value of the subject matter required for appeal
- 5. Gravamen
- 6. Problems and assessment
- II. Time Limits
- 1. Beginning of the time limit
- 2. General length of the time limit
- 3. Extension or shortening of the time limit
- 4. Additional time limits
- 5. Problems and assessment
- III. Representation
- IV. Scope of Review
- 1. Review of law
- 2. Review of facts
- 3. Admissibility of introducing new facts/evidence
- 4. New claims/modification of the complaint
- 5. Problems and assessment
- V. Decision of the Appeal Court
- VI. Consequences on (Provisional) Enforcement
- VII. The Cross-border Context
- 1. Documents provided to a defendant abroad who lost her first instance case
- 2. Information of the parties about the judgment; the question of translation
- 3. Filing an appeal and time limits
- 4. Effects of the proceedings on the enforceability of the judgment
- 5. Problems and assessment
- B. Second Appeal (Third Instance)
- I. General Assessment of the Second Appeal Proceedings
- II. Conditions/Admissibility of Second Appeal
- 1. Judgments subject to second appeal
- 2. Ratione valoris limitation
- 3. Other monetary and fiscal requirements
- 4. Ratione iudicati limitation
- 5. Leave to appeal
- 6. Problems and assessment
- III. Time Limits
- 1. Beginning of the time limit
- 2. General length of the time limit
- 3. Extension or shortening of the time limit
- 4. Problems and assessment
- IV. Representation
- V. Scope of Review
- 1. Typically a review of law
- 2. Problems and assessment
- VI. The Judgment of the Supreme Court
- VII. Consequences on Provisional Enforcement
- VIII. The Cross-border Context
- 1. Documents provided to a party abroad who lost the second instance
- 2. Information of the parties about the judgment; the question of translation
- 3. Filing a second appeal and time limits
- 4. Effects of the second appeal proceedings on the enforceability of the judgment
- C. Proposals and improvements
- I. Information of the parties about the judgment; the question of translation
- II. Information for the parties about legal remedies
- III. Time limits
- IV. Provisional enforcement
- 207–240 Chapter 5. Specific Instruments (Xandra Kramer) 207–240
- A. Introduction
- B. The European Enforcement Order (EEO)
- I. Implementation: Competence, Certification and Review
- 1. Competence for the certification
- 2. Certification as EEO
- 3. Review under Article 19 EEO
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. General problems: rights of defense, review, and lack of familiarity and practice
- 2. Specific problems
- 3. Refusal of the certification and enforcement
- III. Possible Improvements
- C. The European Order for Payment Procedure (EOP)
- I. Implementation: Competence, Assessment, and Review
- 1. Competence to issue an EOP
- 2. Assessment made by the competent (judicial) authority
- 3. Review under Article 20 EOP
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. General problems: service and review, interaction with national law, lack of familiarity and practice
- 2. Specific problems: competence, assessment, forms and language
- 3. Refusal of enforcement
- III. Possible Improvements
- D. The European Small Claim Procedure (ESCP)
- I. Implementation: Competence and Review Procedure
- 1. Competent courts
- 2. Review procedure
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. General problems: lack of knowledge and limited use
- 2. Specific problems: competence, costs, assistance, time-limits, evidence, language, interest, service, and review
- III. Refusal of Enforcement
- IV. Possible Improvements
- E. The European Maintenance Procedure
- I. Implementation: Competence, Financial Support, Legal Standing, Provisional Measures, and Review
- 1. Competence regarding maintenance claims
- 2. Financial support
- 3. Legal standing
- 4. Provisional measures
- 5. Review
- 6. Central Authorities
- II. Problems and Assessment
- 1. Procedural problems
- 2. Difficulties for practitioners
- III. Possible Improvements
- F. Conclusion: General assessment of the application of these specific instruments
- 241–244 Index 241–244
- 245–246 Case Law 245–246
- 247–254 Bibliography 247–254
- 255–480 Annexes 255–480
- Annex I. National Reporters
- Annex II. Full National Report Template
- Annex III. Selected Questions and Responses from the Completed National Reports
- ?Bibliography
- I. Monographs, Edited Volumes and Book Sections
- 1. Books
- Cadiet, Loic ; Jeuland, Emmanuel, Droit judiciaire privé (Litec 6th edn., 2013).
- Crifò, Carla, Cross-Border Enforcement of Debts in the European Union, Default Judgments, Summary Judgments and Orders for Payment (Kluwer Law International 2009).
- Dickinson, Andrew and Lein, Eva, The Brussels I Regulation Recast (OUP 2015).
- Fasching and Konecny (Eds) Kommentar zu den Zivil prozessgesetzen (2nd ed., Manzsch’sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchandlung, Vienna, 2010).
- Guinchard, Serge; Ferrand, Frederique and Chainais Cecile, Procédure civile (Dalloz 32nd ed. 2014).
- Hazelhorst, Monique, Free Movement of Civil Judgments in the European Union and the Right to a Fair Trial, The Hague, Asser Press 2017.
- Jeuland, Emmanuel, Introduction to French Business Litigation (1st edn., Joly editions 2016).
- Linke, Harmut & Hau, Wolfang, Internationales Zivilverfahrensrecht (C.H. Beck, 5th edn. 2015).
- Mayer, Pierre and Heuzé, Vincent, Droit international privé (LGDJ 11th ed. 2014).
- Nioche, Marie, La décision provisoire en droit international privé européen (Bruylant 2012).
- Ontanu, Elena Alina, Cross-Border Debt Recovery in the EU. A Comparative and Empirical Study on the Use of European Uniform Procedures, Thesis, Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam.
- Rosenberg, Leo; Schwab, Karl Heinz and Gottwald, Peter, Zivilprozessrecht (17th edn, C.H. Beck 2010).
- Sime Stuart and French, Derek (eds) Blackstone’s Civil Practice (Oxford University Press 2014).
- Tuo, Chiara, La rivalutazione della sentenza straniera nel regolamento Bruxelles 1: tradivieti e reciproca fiducia (CEDAM 2012).
- Zuckerman, Adrian, Zuckerman on Civil Procedure (3rd edn., Sweet & Maxwell 2013).
- 2. Chapters in edited volumes
- Angst, Peter and Oberhammer, Paul (eds), Exekutionsordnung (Manz 3rd edn., 2015).
- Berger, Thomas, ‘Luxembourg’, in Newman, Lawrence W. (ed), Attachment of assets (Juris 2016).
- Colvin, Andrew; Vigoriti, Vincenzo and Calabresi, Roberto ‘Italy’ in Layton and Mercer (general eds), European Civil Practice (Sweet & Maxwell 2004).
- Crifò, Carla, ‘Civil Procedure in the European Order: An Overview of the Latest Developments’ in, Déirde Dwyer (ed.), The Civil Procedure Rules Ten Years On (Oxford University Press 2009).
- Deshayes, Béatrice, ‘De la nécessité d’harmoniser les règles régissant l‘expertise en Europe: une approche comparative franco-allemande, in P. Grandjean (ed.), Expertise de justice – Quel avenir en Europe (Bruylant 2014).
- Gottwald, Peter, ‘Review appeal to the German Federal Court after the reform of 2001’ in Ramos, Manuel Ortells (ed.), Los recursos ante Tribunales Supremos en Europa. Appeals to Supreme Courts in Europe (Difusion Juridica 2008) 96.
- Hayaux du Tilly, Emmanuel, ‘France’ in Layton and Mercer (general eds.) European Civil Practice (Sweet & Maxwell 2004).
- Hein, Jan von ‘Art 1, no. 51’ in Rauscher, Europäisches Zivilprozess- und Kollisionsrecht, vol. 2 (Otto Schmidt 4th ed. 2015).
- Hess, Burkhard; Raffelsieper, Katharina ‘Die Europäische Kontenpfändungsverordnung: Eine überfällige Reform zur Effektuierung grenzüberschreitender Vollstreckung im Europäischen Justizraum’, in IPRax 2015.
- Jolowicz, John Anthony, ‘Introduction: Recourse Against Civil Judgments in the European Union: A Comparative Survey’ in Chase and Hershkoff (general eds), Civil Litigation in Comparative Context (Thomson/West 2007) 331.
- Kern, Christoph A., ‘Comparative Civil Procedure – Fundamentals and Recent Trends’ in Gedächtnisschrift für Halftk Konuralp I (Yetkin Yayinlari 2009).
- Kern, Christoph A., The Role of the Supreme Court, (RePro 228, ano 39, fevereiro 2014).
- Kramer, Xandra, ‘European Procedures on Debt Collection: Nothing or Noting? Experiences and Future Prospects’ in Hess, Burkhard; Bergström, Maria and Storskrubb, Eva (eds), EU Civil Justice: Current Issues and Future Outlook (Hart Publishing 2016) 97.
- Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung (5th edn, 2016).
- Münchener Kommentar, Zivilprozessordnung, Vol. 3 (5th ed. C.H. Beck 2018).
- Musielak, Zivilprozessordnung, (Beck, 10th ed 2013) EuGVO.
- Stürner; Rolf and Kern, Christoph A., ‘Comparative Civil Procedure – Fundamentalsand Recent Trends’ in Gedächtnisschrift für Halftk Konuralp I (Yetkin Yayinlari 2009) 1002.
- Taelman, Piet, ‘Belgium’, in L.W. Newman (ed), Attachment of assets (Juris 2016).
- Toussaint, Guido in Münchener Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung (C.H. Beck 2016) vol. 1.
- Uzelac, Alan; van Rhee, Cornelis Hendrik, ‘Appeals and other means of recourse against judgments in the context of the effective protection of civil rights and obligation’ in Alan Uzelac, Cornelis Hendrik van Rhee (eds), Nobody’s perfect. Comparative Essays on appeals and other means of recourse against judicial decisions in civil matters (Intersentia 2014).
- Wautelet, Patrick, ‘Art 59 no 12.’, in Bonomi, Andrea & Wautelet, Patrick (eds), Droit européen des successions, (Bruylant 2nd ed. 2016).
- Weiser, Irene, ‘Austria’ in Layton and Mercer (general eds), European Civil Practice (Sweet & Maxwell 2004) 37.
- Zöller, ZPO (OttoSchmidt, 30th ed 2014).
- 3. Articles, Notes and Papers
- Yein, Gar Ng, ‘European Payment Order and European Small Claim Online Simulation UK-Italy. Regulations (EC) No. 1896/2006 and 861/2007’, Building Interoperability for European Civil Proceedings Online, Research Conference – Bologna, 15–16 June 2012, available at http://www.irsig.cnr.it/BIEPCO/ documents/case_studies/EPO_Simulation_Gar_Yein.pdf).
- Cuniberti, Gilles, ‘L’expertise judiciaire en droit judiciaire européen’, Rev. Crit. DIP 2015, 519.
- Kramer, Xandra; Ontanu, Elena Alina, ‘The functioning of the European Small Claims Procedure in The Netherlands: normative and empirical reflections’, Nederlands Internationaal Privaatrecht (NIPR) 2013, 319.
- Huet, André, Note on Cass. Civ. 1ère, 11 December 2001, Case no 00-18.547, J. Dr. Int. 2003, 152.
- Muir Watt, Horatia, Note on Cass. Civ. 1ère, 11 December 2001, Case no 00-18.547, Rev. Crit. DIP 2002, p. 317.
- Niggemann, Friedrich, Note on OLG München, 19 February 2014, IPRax 2015, 75.
- Cuniberti, Gilles, Note on Court of Appeal, 15 July 2015, case no 42489, JTL Lux 2015, 179.
- II. Reports and Studies
- Hess, Burkhard and Pfeiffer, Thomas, Interpretation of the Public Policy Exception as referred to in EU Instruments of Private International and Procedural Law (European Parliament Study), available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2011/453189/IPOL-JURI_ET(2011)453189_EN. pdf.
- Hess, Burkhard; Pfeiffer, Thomas and Schlosser, Peter, “The Heidelberg Report”, Study JLS/C4/2005/03 Report on the Application of Regulation Brussels I in the Member States, 2007, available at: http://ec. europa.eu/civiljustice/news/docs/study_application_brussels_1_en.pdf.
- Deloitte, Assessment of the socio-economic impacts of the policy options for the Future of the European Small Claims Regulation, Final Report, RDT-L05-2010, Brussels, 19.07.2013.
- European Commission, Less bureaucracy for citizens: promoting free movement of public documents and recognition of the effects of civil status records, COM(2010) 747 final.
- European Commission, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the
- European Economic and Social Committee on the application of the Regulation (EC) No. 861/2007 of the
- European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, COM (2013) 795 final, Brussels, 19.11.2013.
- European Commission, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the
- European Economic and Social Committee on the application of the Regulation (EC) No. 861/2007 of the
- European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, COM(2013) 795 final, Brussels, 19.11.2013.
- European Commission, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council and the
- European Economic and Social Committee on the application of Regulation (EC) 1896/2006 of the
- European Parliament and of the Council creating a European Order for Payment Procedure, COM(2015) 495 final.
- Cuniberti, Gilles, Civil Judicial Experts in the EU: Analysis of EU Legislation and Recommendations, Report for the Legal Committee of the European Parliament (2015).
- Kramer, Xandra, Tuil and Tillema, Ministry of Justice Report 2012.
- Optimity Matrix, Case study on the functioning of enforcement proceedings relating to judicial decisions in Member States, Final Report February 2015.
- Study on the application of Articles 3(1)(C) and 3, and Articles 17 and 18 of the Council Regulation (EC) NO 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the member states in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters, June 2012, final_report_1206, available at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/final_report_1206_en.pdf.
- Study on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 on the taking of evidence on civil and commercial matters, March 2007, final_report_ec_1206_2001_a_09032007, available at http://ec.europa.eu/civiljustice/publications/docs/final_report_ec_1206_2001_a_09032007.pdf.
- Hess, Burkhard, Study No. JAI/A3/2002/02 on making more efficient the enforcement of judicial decisions within the European Union: Transparency of a Debtor’s Assets, Attachment of Bank Accounts, Provisional Enforcement and Protective Measures, available at: http://www2.ipr.uni-heidelberg.de/studie/.
- III. Legislation
- 1. Treaties
- International Agreement between the European Community and the Kingdom of Denmark on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters [2009] OJ L 449/ 80.
- 2. EU Regulations
- Council Regulation (EC) No. 6/2002 of 12 December 2001.
- Council Regulation No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009.
- Council Regulation No 40/94 of 20 December 1993.
- Regulation (EC) 1393/2007.
- Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters.
- Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure, [2006] OJ L399/1. (EOP Regulation)
- Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 of 18 December 2008 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations, [2009] OJ L 7/ 1. (Maintenance Regulation).
- Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order foruncontested claims, [2004] L143/15. (EEO Regulation).
- Regulation (EC) No 861/2007 of 11 July 2007 establishing a European Small Claims Procedure, [2007] OJ L199/1. (ESCP Regulation).
- Regulation (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussels I bis regulation).
- Regulation (EU) 2016/1191 on promoting the free movement of citizens by simplifying the requirements for presenting certain public documents in the European Union and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/ 2012.
- Regulation (EU) 655/2014 establishing a European Account Preservation Order procedure to facilitate cross-border debt recovery in civil and commercial matters. (EAPO Regulation).
- 3. EU Directives
- Council Directive 2002/8/EC of 27 January 2003.
- Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights.
- Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union.
- Directive 2016/943 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on the protection of undisclosed know-how and business information (trade secrets) against their unlawful acquisition, use and disclosure.
- IV. EU Opinions and Recommendations
- Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 11 May 2001, OJ 2001 C 139, 10.
- Opinion of the Parliament, single reading, 14 March 2001, A5?0073/2001, OJ 2001 C 343, 184.
- V. Cases
- ECtHR, Martins Silva v. Portugal, application no 12959/10.
- ECtHR, Augusto v. France, application no 71665/01.
- ECtHR, Mantovanelli v. France, application no 21497/93.
- ECtHR, Feldbrugge v. Netherlands, application no. 8562/79. 1. CJEU
- C-94/14, Flight Refund Ltd v. Deutsche Lufthansa AG, ECLI:EU:C:2016:148.
- C-559/14, Meroni v. Recoletos Limited, ECLI:EU:C:2016:349.
- C-511/14, Pebros Servizi Srl v. Aston Martin Lagonda Ltd [2016], ECLI:EU:C:2016:448.
- C-70/15, Lebek v. Janusz Domino, ECLl:EU:C:2016:524.
- C-184/14, A v. B, ECLI:EU:C:2015:479.
- C-681/13, Diageo Brands v. Simiramida-04 EOOD, ECLI:EU:C:2015:471.
- C-300/14, Imtech Marine Belgium NV v. Radio Hellenic SA, ECLI:EU:C:2015:825.
- Joined cases C-119/13 and C-120/13, eco cosmetics GmbH & Co. KG and Raiffeisenbank St. Georgen reg. Gen. mbH v. Virginie Laetitia Barbara Dupuy und Tetyana Bonchyk, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2144.
- C-112/13, A v. B a.o., ECLI:EU :C:2014:2:195.
- C- 302/13, flyLAL-Lithuanian Airlines AS v. Starptautisk? lidosta R?ga VAS und Air Baltic Corporation AS, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2319.
- C-332/11, ProRail BV v. Xpedys NV a.o., ECLI:EU:C:2013:87.
- C-508/12, Walter Vapenik v. Josef Thurner, ECLI:EU:C:2013:790.
- C-292/10, G v. Cornelius de Visser, ECLI:EU:C:2012:142.
- C-514/10, Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH v. SEWAR spol. s r.o., EU:C:2012:367.
- Case C-170/11, Lippens v. Kortekaas a.o., ECLI:EU:C:2012:540.
- C-619/10, Trade Agency Ltd v. Seramico Investments Ltd, ECLI:EU:C:2012:531.
- C-215/11, Iwona Szyrocka v. SiGer Technologie GmbH, ECLI:EU:C:2012:794.
- C-325/11, Krystyna Alder und Ewald Alder v. Sabina Or?owska und Czeslaw Or?owski, ECLI:EU:C:2012:824.
- C-406/09, Realchemie Nederland BV v. Bayer CropScience AG, ECLI:EU:C:2011:668.
- C-394/07, Gambazzi v. DaimlerChrysler Canada Inc. and CIBC Mellon Trust Companyi, ECLI:EU: C:2009:219.
- C-104/03, St. Paul Dairy Industries NV v. Unibel Exser BVBA, ECLI:EU:C:2005:255.
- C-522/03, Scania Finance France SA v. Rockinger Spezialfabrik für Anhängerkupplungen GmbH & Co, ECLI:EU:C:2005:606.
- C-99/96, Hans-Hermann Mietz v. Intership Yachting Sneek, BV ECLI:EU:C:1999:202.
- C-391/95, Van Uden Maritime BV v. Kommanditgesellschaft in Firma Deco-Line u. a., ECLI:EU: C:1998:543.
- C-78/95, Hendrikman v. Magenta Druck & Verlag GmbH, ECLI:EU:C:1996:380.
- C-228/81, Pendy Plastic Products BV v. Pluspunkt Handelsgesellschaft mbH, ECLI:EU:C:1982:276.
- C-166/80, Klomps v. Michel, ECLI:EU:C:1981:137.
- C-125/79, Denilauler v. Couchet Frères, ECLI:EU:C:1980:130.
- 2. Austria
- Austrian Supreme Court, 21 January 2015, 3 Ob 232/14 k, Case 14K.0121.000, ECLI:AT:OGH0002:2015:0030OB00232.
- Austrian Supreme Court, 19 June 2013, 84/13 v, Case 13V.0619.000, ECLI:AT:OGH0002:2013:0030OB00084.
- Austrian Supreme Court, 31 January 2007, 3 Ob 9/07 f, Case 07F.0131.000, ECLI:AT:OGH0002:2007:0030OB00009.
- 3. Belgium
- Cass. 28 January 2005, Pasicrisie 2005, Vol. 1, 224.
- Court of First Instance Brussels, 13 October 2004, Tijdschrift voor Belgisch burgerlijk recht 2005, 125.
- 4. Estonia
- Estonian Supreme Court 1 December 2010, No 3-2-1-117-10.
- 5. France
- Cass. Com, 3 April 2013, n° 11-19.000.
- Cass. Civ. 2eme, 22 February 2012, no 10-28379.
- Cass. Civ. 1ère, 4 June 2009, no 08-12482.
- Cass. Civ. 1ère, 9 November 1971, n° 70-14017
- CA Bordeaux, 31 March 2016, n° 14/05833.
- CA Metz, 19 April 2016, n° 14/00029.
- CA Bordeaux, 15 May 2013, no 12/02578;
- CA Nancy, 30 March 2015, no 14/00839;
- CA Versailles, 2 October 2014, n° 14/01687.
- CA Pau, 12 April 2013, n° 13/1582.
- CA Nancy, 11 June 2013, n° 12/02657.
- 6. Germany
- BGH, 10 September 2015, IX ZB 39/13, NJW 2016, 160–163.
- BGH, 3 August 2011, XII ZB 187/10, NJW 2011, 3103–3106.
- BGH 26 August 2009, XII ZB 169/07.
- BGH, 26 November 2009, VII ZB 42/08, NJW 2010–2138.
- BGH, 6 May 2004, IX ZB 43/03, NJW 2004, 2386–2388.
- OLG Hamburg, 7 November 2008, 6 W 22/08, BeckRS 2009, 04375.
- OLG Düsseldorf, 11 October 1999, 3 W 258/99, NJW 2000, 3290- 3291.
- OLG Köln, 6 October 1994, 7 W 34/94, NJW-RR 1995, 446–448.
- LG München, 19 January 2011, 6 T 6032/09, BeckRS 2010, 12370.
- LG Trier, 17 October 2002, 7 HKO 140/01, NJW-RR 2003 , 287–288.
- 7. Greece
- Greek Supreme Court 1028/2009, Civil Procedure Law Review 2010, p. 55.
- Thessaloniki CoA 164/2010, Civil Procedure Law Review 2010, 709.
- Athens CoA 1356/2007, Hellenic Justice 2008, 1498.
- Thessaloniki CoA 2321/2007.
- Thessaloniki CoA 3299/2000, Armenopoulos 2001, p. 377.
- Thessaloniki CoA 267/1999, Armenopoulos 1999, p. 718 = Commercial law Survey 1999, p. 275.
- Athens CoA 10698/1995, Hellenic Justice 1996, 1402.
- District Court Thessaloniki 15948/2009 Armenopoulos 1999, p. 718.
- Drama 1 s t Instance Court 251/2000, Armenopoulos 2001.
- 8. Italy
- Court of Appeal Milan, Gambazzi v Daimler Chrysler Canada Inc. and CIBC Mellon Trust Company,
- 14 December 2010.
- 9. Luxembourg
- Judgment of 10 February 2011, case no 35005.
- 10. Poland
- Polish Supreme Court, 27 November 2014, V CSK 487/13.
- 11. Romania
- Bucharest Court of Appeal, Decision No. 3226/26.05.2010.
- Vrancea General Court, Decision No. 63/15.06.2015.
- Oradea General Court, Civil Section, Decision 7716, 22.09.2015.
- General Court, Decision No. 1067/19.10.2010.
- Bucharest General Court, Commercial Section, Decision 14351/2009.
- 12. Slovenia
- Appellate Court in Koper, II Ip 429/2013, 17.10.2013, ECLI:SI:VSKP:2013:II.IP.429.2013.
- Appellate Court Koper, II Ip 312/2012, 18.10.2012, ECLI:SI:VSKP:2012:II.IP.312.2012.
- 13. Spain
- Court of Appeal of Barcelona, 4 October 2012 [AP Barcelona (19ª), 122/2012, ECLI:ES:APB:2012:7160A.
- Court of Appeal of Madrid, 12 February 2002, JUR\2002\132026).
- 14. The Netherlands
- Netherlands Supreme Court, ECLI:NL:HR:2011:BP0003.
- District Court Utrecht, ECLI:NL:RBUTR:2011:BU5866.
- Rotterdam District Court, NL:RBROT:2009:BL187.
- District Court The Hague, ECLI:NL:RBHAA:2009:BK6667.
- 15. UK
- MD & CT [2014] EWHC 871 (Farn) CH2FN 190.
- Reeve & Others v Plummer [2014] EWHC 362 (QB), 18 December 2014
