Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2016:367
Date: 2016-05-26
Language of the case: Polish
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Poland

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 13 October 2016 1. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in the matters of parental responsibility — Regulation No 2201/2003 — Scope — Concept of ‘annulment of marriage’ — Action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party after the death of one of the spouses — Included (Council Regulation No 2201/2003, Art. 1(1)(a) and 3) 2. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in the matters of parental responsibility — Regulation No 2201/2003 — General jurisdiction — Alternative grounds of jurisdiction laid down in the fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a) — Concept of ‘applicant’ — Independent and uniform interpretation (Council Regulation No 2201/2003, Art. 3(1)(a), indents 5and 6) 3. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and in the matters of parental responsibility — Regulation No 2201/2003 — Alternative grounds of jurisdiction laid down in the fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a) — Concept of ‘applicant’ — Person other than one of the spouses — Not included (Council Regulation No 2201/2003, Art. 3(1)(a), indents 5 and 6) 1. Article 1(1)(a) of Regulation No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation No 1347/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that an action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party following the death of one of the spouses falls within the scope of Regulation No 2201/2003. First, as regards the terms of that article, that provision states that marriage annulment, inter alia, is one of the matters which fall within the scope of that regulation, without making any distinction on the basis of the date on which such an action is brought in relation to the death of one of the spouses or the identity of the person entitled to bring such an action. Secondly, such an interpretation is supported by the context of that provision. In that regard, Article 1(3) of that regulation provides an exhaustive list of matters excluded from the scope of the regulation. An action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party following the death of one of the spouses is not included in that list of excluded matters. Thirdly, that interpretation is also borne out by the objective pursued by that regulation which contributes to the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice, in which the free movement of persons is ensured. Excluding an action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party after the death of one of the spouses from the scope of Regulation No 2201/2003 would undermine the attainment of that objective, in so far as that exclusion would be liable to increase legal uncertainty as a result of there being no uniform regulatory framework in this area, especially since Regulation No 650/2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession does not cover matters relating to the status of natural persons or family relationships. (see paras 27-30, 32-34, 37, operative part 1) 2. See the text of the decision. (see paras 44, 45) 3. The fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation No 1347/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that a person other than one of the spouses who brings an action for annulment of marriage may not rely on the grounds of jurisdiction set out in those provisions. The jurisdiction rules laid down in Article 3 of Regulation No 2201/2003, including those referred to in the fifth and sixth indents of Article 3(1)(a), are designed to protect the interests of spouses. Such an interpretation is also consonant with the objective pursued by that regulation, which established flexible conflict of law rules to reflect the mobility of individuals and to protect the rights of a spouse who has left the country of common habitual residence, while ensuring there is a genuine link between the party concerned and the Member State exercising jurisdiction. It follows that, while an action for annulment of marriage brought by a third party falls within the scope of Regulation No 2201/2003, the third party must be bound by the jurisdiction rules set out for the benefit of spouses. That interpretation does not, moreover, deprive that third party of access to the courts, since the third party may rely on other grounds of jurisdiction provided for in Article 3 of that regulation. (see paras 49-51, 53, operative part 2)