LG Stuttgart; 2014-12-10; 13 S 115/14
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:DE:LGSTUTT:2014:1210.13S115.14.0A
Date: 2014-12-10
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Germany

82014DE1210(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
A private person domiciled in Germany (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) filed an action against an air carrier domiciled in Finland (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) claiming compensation under Article 7(1)(b) of the Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1).
The plaintiff booked a flight from Stuttgart through Paris to Helsinki with an airline domiciled in Paris. Only the second flight was supposed to be conducted by the defendant. The plane of the defendant landed in Helsinki with a delay of more than 3 hours. The plaintiff claimed that he was entitled to receive a compensation from the defendant in the amount of EUR 400.
The Amtsgericht Nürtingen (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) dismissed the action as inadmissible stating the lack of international jurisdiction under Article (5)(1)(b) of the Brussels I Regulation (2).
The appeal of the defendant lodged with the Landgericht Stuttgart (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) was not successful.
Jurisdiction according to the domicile of the defendant under Article 15(3) of the Brussels I Regulation is not given in this case.
The Court of First Instance correctly concluded that Article 5(1)(b) of the Brussels I Regulation should not be applied in this case.
The Court of Justice of the European Union interpreted this provision to apply for cases where the air transport of passengers is carried out from one Member State to another on a basis of a contract entered into with a single airline, namely the operating air carrier. In these cases, passengers might choose the court competent for the starting point of the first flight or the arrival destination.
In this case, however, two different contracts have been made. The defendant was responsible only for the second part of the flight from Paris to Helsinki, which clearly follows from the booking documents. The plaintiff may choose between the courts at the place of departure (Paris) or the place of arrival (Helsinki).
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of the defendant against the judgment of the Court of First Instance.
(1) Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.