Višje sodišče v Ljubljani; 2024-11-18; I Ip 1054/2024
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2024:I.IP.1054.2024
Date: 2024-11-18
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Slovenia

82024SI1118(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, examined by the Višje sodišče v Ljubljani (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’), concerned the binding effect of a certificate of enforceability issued by a foreign court in cross-border enforcement proceedings.
A creditor (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) sought enforcement in Slovenia on the basis of a certificate of enforceability issued under Article 53 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1), relating to three Austrian judicial decisions constituting enforceable titles. The debtor (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) objected, arguing that the certificate should not have been issued because, pursuant to Article 66 of the Regulation, the Regulation applies only to proceedings instituted on or after 10 January 2015, whereas the Austrian proceedings had been instituted earlier. The Court of First Instance rejected the objection, holding that it was bound by the information contained in the certificate.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld that reasoning. It confirmed that an enforcement court is strictly bound by a certificate of enforceability and lacks competence to review its substantive correctness or the conditions under which it was issued. Under national law, in particular Articles 42, 42a and 42c of the ZIZ (2), an incorrect certificate of enforceability may be corrected or revoked only by the authority that issued it. The Court of Appeal emphasised that this principle applies even more so to certificates issued by foreign courts. If the defendant considers that the Austrian court erred in issuing the certificate, including as regards the temporal application of the Regulation, it must seek its correction or revocation before the Austrian court. Until then, the Slovenian court, acting as the court of enforcement, remains bound by the certificate.
The Court of Appeal also dismissed the defendant’s argument that enforcement had been sought only in respect of one of the Austrian judgments. It noted that the certificate expressly referred to all three judicial decisions relied upon as enforcement titles.
However, the Court of Appeal partially upheld the appeal concerning the scope of the interest to be enforced. It found that the certificate of enforceability confirmed the enforceability of interest only up to 31 December 2012 and did not extend to interest accruing from 1 January 2013 onwards. As enforcement may be authorised solely within the limits of the enforceable title as defined by the certificate, the Court of First Instance erred in allowing enforcement of interest beyond that date.
Accordingly, the Court of Appeal partially allowed the appeal by excluding enforcement of interest accruing from 1 January 2013 onwards, while dismissing the appeal in all other respects and upholding the remainder of the decision.
(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) Zakon o izvršbi in zavarovanju (Enforcement and Security Act).