Judecatoria Carei; 2016-11-01; 1557/218/2016
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:RO:JDCRI:2016:001.001220
Date: 2016-11-01
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Romania

82016RO1101(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
Following a road accident in France, a company domiciled in Romania (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) brought an action before the Judecatoria Carei (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) as the court of its registered office. The accident involved two vehicles, one driven by the employee of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sought an order that the civil liability insurer of the person driving the other car should pay the compensation.
The Court of First Instance declared a lack of its jurisdiction to hear the case since the case does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Romanian courts and dismissed the action. The Court of First Instance cited Article 11(1)(a) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1) and held that the insurer, domiciled in another Member State of the European Union, may be sued in the courts of the Member State in which he is domiciled. Considering this provision, the Court of First Instance held that the French courts should have jurisdiction over the case.
The Court of First Instance refused to apply Article 11(1)(b) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) invoked by the plaintiff, since the plaintiff, as a third party injured because of the road accident, is not a ‘beneficiary’ within the meaning of the provision invoked. The concept of ‘insurance beneficiary’ is specific to the insurance of persons, not to civil liability insurance. The beneficiary of the insurance is the person designated by the contracting party to receive the insurance indemnity. This could be inferred from Article 2230 C.civ (2), which provides that the insurance indemnity is payable to the insured or the beneficiary designated by the insured.
The judgment became final following the appeal lodged to the Tribunalul Satu-Mare (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’). The Court of Appeal upheld the first instance conclusions concerning the lack of jurisdiction of the Romanian courts and confirmed the correct application of the Brussels I Regulation (recast).
(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) Codul de Procedură Civilă (Code of Civil Procedure).