Višje sodišče v Ljubljani; 2024-10-04; III Cp 1199/2024
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2024:III.CP.1199.2024
Date: 2024-10-04
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Slovenia

82024SI1004(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, examined by the Višje sodišče v Ljubljani (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’), concerned the international jurisdiction of Slovenian courts in a collective consumer dispute involving multiple defendants.
An institute acting as a qualified entity (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) brought an action before the Court of First Instance against several defendants, seeking damages resulting from the alleged criminal offence of embezzlement, which led to significant losses to the investors’ assets. The investors had concluded deposit management contracts with the second defendant, a foreign company established in Germany, which operated in Slovenia through a representative and intermediaries (the first, third, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants).
The defendants objected to the jurisdiction of the Slovenian courts. The Court of First Instance rejected this objection, relying on the jurisdiction rules for consumer contracts under the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1). It treated the investors as consumers and the plaintiff as a qualified entity entitled to bring a claim on their behalf to protect collective consumer interests.
The defendants appealed, proposing that the Court of Appeal request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on whether a legal entity could be considered a ‘consumer’ under the Brussels I Regulation (recast) and whether the Slovenian legislation granting such standing was consistent with European Union law. They further argued that the agreements contained a clause conferring jurisdiction on German courts, that high-value investments do not constitute consumer contracts, and that jurisdiction was excluded for defendants domiciled outside the European Union (specifically Liechtenstein).
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It rejected the request for a preliminary ruling, noting that the legal standing of the plaintiff is clearly established by Directive (EU) 2020/1828 (2), which was transposed into Slovenian law by the ZKolT (3). Under these rules, a qualified entity (a legal person) is expressly entitled to bring representative actions on behalf of consumers.
As to the nature of the dispute, the Court of Appeal held that the investors were consumers. It noted that the contracts were not concluded for professional or commercial purposes and, referring to the case-law of the CJEU, held that the high value of the invested amounts was irrelevant for determining consumer status. Consequently, the jurisdiction clause favouring German courts was invalid under Article 19 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast), as it had been concluded before the dispute arose.
Concerning the defendants domiciled in Liechtenstein (the seventh and eleventh defendants), the Court of Appeal held that, since they are not domiciled in a Member State, jurisdiction is determined by national law as provided for in the Brussels I Regulation (recast). Applying the ZMZPP (4), the Court found that Slovenian jurisdiction was justified on two grounds. First, under Article 49 of the ZMZPP, jurisdiction exists over co-defendants where one of them has a permanent residence or registered office in Slovenia, which was the case for the third, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants. Second, under Article 55(1) of the ZMZPP, jurisdiction exists in disputes concerning non-contractual liability if the harmful event occurred or the harmful consequences ensued in Slovenia.
The Court of Appeal concluded that the Court of First Instance had correctly established the relevant facts and applied the law. Accordingly, it dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the Court of First Instance.
(1) 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 (recast).
(2) Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC.
(3) Zakon o kolektivnih tožbah (Collective Actions Act).
(4) Zakon o mednarodnem zasebnem pravu in postopku (Private International Law and Procedure Act)