Nejvyšší soud; 2020-01-29; 27 Cdo 4100/2018
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2020:27.CDO.4100.2018.1
Date: 2020-01-29
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Czechia

82020CZ0129(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international jurisdiction of the Czech courts resolved by the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’).
A legal person domiciled in the Czech Republic (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) brought an action against a company domiciled in Luxembourg (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) for payment of an amount of approximately CZK 8,8 million due to alleged unjustified enrichment.
The defendant contested the jurisdiction of the Czech courts, but the Městský soud v Praze (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) declared that jurisdiction of the Czech courts is given and that the proceedings shall continue.
Following an appeal by the defendant, the Vrchní soud v Praze (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) confirmed the conclusion of the Court of First Instance. The jurisdiction was established on the basis of Article 7(2) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1), according to which ‘a person domiciled in a Member State may be sued in another Member State, in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict, in the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred or may occur’.
The defendant applied for a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court recalled that the term ‘matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict’ within the meaning of Article 7(2) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) must be regarded as an independent concept covering all actions which seek to establish the liability of a defendant and which are not related to a ‘contract’ within the meaning of Article 7(1) (2). Article 7(2) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) is therefore applicable also to the current case based on alleged unjustified enrichment.
The cassation appeal was dismissed and the conclusions of lower courts establishing the jurisdiction of the Czech courts were confirmed.
(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.
(2) Judgment of the Court of 27 September 1988, Athanasios Kalfelis v Bankhaus Schröder, Münchmeyer, Hengst and Co. and others, C-189/87, ECLI:EU:C:1988:459, paragraph 18.