OGH; 2022-09-29; 3 Ob 126/22h
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:AT:OGH0002:2022:0030OB00126.22H.0929.000
Date: 2022-09-29
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Austria

82022AT0929(52)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
The plaintiff applied under Article 354 of the Enforcement Act (1) for the enforcement of an enforceable judgement issued by the Landgerichts Köln in Germany ordering a private limited company (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) under the threat of a penalty set by the court to cease and desist from marking shoes with a specific logo, placing them on the market or having such activities carried out by third parties, and to inform the plaintiff about the scope of the activities defined in the judgment which the defendant had carried out (hereinafter ‘the German judgement’).
The Bezirksgericht Neumarkt bei Salzburg (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) granted to the plaintiff the enforcement of the demand to be provided information under point 2 of the German judgement. Based on the revision filed by the defendant, the Landesgericht Salzburg (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) dismissed the enforcement application, citing that because the plaintiff had initiated enforcement proceedings with the Landgericht Köln before which the defendant entered an appearance without any objections to the jurisdiction, the principle of exclusive jurisdiction under Article 24(5) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (2) applied due to the pendency of the enforcement proceedings in Germany. The exclusive jurisdiction supersedes both the jurisdiction of the courts according to the domicile of the defendant and special jurisdictions under Article 7 ff. of the Brussels I Regulation (recast).
The revision filed by the plaintiff with the Oberstes Gerichtshof (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’) was found admissible and justified. The term ‘proceedings concerned with the enforcement of judgments’ is to be interpreted independently under the laws of the European Union. It is to be understood as proceedings resulting from the use of legal remedies. The enforcement is a direct subject-matter of the proceedings. Article 24(5) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) includes proceedings resulting from an enforcement but not the enforcement proceedings themselves. The above article does not determine in which Member State the enforcement proceedings are to be initiated, and it does not exclude the enforcement in several Member States.
The Supreme Court modified the resolution of the Court of Appeal and reinstated the approval of the enforcement as issued by the Court of First Instance.
(1) Gesetz vom 27. Mai 1896 über das Executions- und Sicherungsverfahren (Law of 27 May 1896 on enforcement and attachment procedures).
(2) Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.