Judecatoria Botosani; 2019-04-12; 2406/193/2019
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:RO:JDBTS:2019:001.001504
Date: 2019-04-12
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Romania

82019RO0412(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international jurisdiction in a dispute concerning a sales contract examined by the Judecătoria Botoşani (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’).
A company domiciled in Romania (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) concluded a sales contract for joinery products with a company domiciled in Germany (hereinafter ‘the defendant’). The plaintiff delivered the goods to Germany, where the defendant confirmed their receipt. However, the defendant repaid only part of the agreed amount. The plaintiff, relying on the Codul de Procedură Civilă (1) provisions, applied before the Court of First Instance and sought the payment of the remaining amount due, together with interest.
The defendant objected to the jurisdiction of the Romanian courts. It invoked Article 5(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (2) according to which ‘a person domiciled in a Member State may, in another Member State, be sued, in matters relating to a contract, in the courts for the place of performance of the obligation in question […] the place of performance of the obligation in question shall be, in the case of the sale of goods, the place in a Member State where, under the contract, the goods were delivered or should have been delivered.’
The Court of First Instance recalled the priority of European Union law over Romanian national law. It held that the case falls within the scope of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (3). In the present case, the defendant has proved that it is domiciled in Germany. It was also reliably demonstrated that the contract included transport services and that the goods were delivered to Germany. The general jurisdiction clause set in Article 4 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) provides that ‘persons domiciled in a Member State shall, whatever their nationality, be sued in the courts of that Member State’. Article 5 further specifies that ‘persons domiciled in a Member State may be sued in the courts of another Member State only by virtue of the rules set out in Sections 2 to 7 of this Chapter’. The Court of First Instance found no exception to the general jurisdiction clause applicable to the present case. Moreover, the place of performance of the obligation in question designated pursuant to Article 7 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (identical to Article 5 of the Brussels I Regulation) was also in Germany.
Therefore, the Court of First Instance upheld the defendant’s plea of a lack of international jurisdiction of the Romanian courts and dismissed the action.
(1) Codul de Procedură Civilă (Code of Civil Procedure)
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
(3) 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.