OLG Köln; 2017-09-01; I-6 U 186/16
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:DE:OLGK:2017:0901.6U186.16.00
Date: 2017-09-01
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Germany

82017DE0901(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
Several plaintiffs domiciled in Germany (hereinafter ‘the plaintiffs’) made claims against Greece (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) seeking the refund of finances and compensation for damage.
The plaintiffs acquired between 2010 and 2012 different government bonds of the defendant. Having regard to the debt crisis and aiming to restructure the debt of the country, the Greek government adopted Act no. 4050/2012 stipulating that also those bond creditors (incl. the plaintiffs) who had not accepted the debt restructuring offer reducing the nominal value of the debt by 53.5 % were to be included in the restructuring process.
The Landgericht Bonn (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) was supposed to have international and local jurisdiction as place of jurisdiction for consumer matters under Article 15 and 16 of the Brussels I Regulation (1).
The defendant claimed to have had state immunity when adopting the relevant act and that the scope of application of the above provision regarded solely civil and commercial matters, and therefore considered the action to be inadmissible.
The Court of First Instance dismissed the action as inadmissible stating that the defendant had state immunity.
The admissible appeal of the defendant lodged with the Oberlandesgericht Köln (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) was unjustified.
The activities through which the foreign State exercise its sovereignty are covered by unlimited state immunity, as long as the foreign state does not renounce them itself. The adoption of legislation is one such activity.
The impossibility to claim compensation for damage by the German creditors on the basis of an obligatory exchange of Greek bonds due to the state immunity had already been confirmed even by the Bundesgerichtshof (German Federal Court of Justice) (2).
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of the plaintiff.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
(2) Judgment of 8 March 2016, BGHZ 209, 191, Juris-Tz. 11 ff.