Nejvyšší soud; 2018-02-28; 30 Nd 248/2018
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2019:30.ND.248.2018.1
Date: 2019-02-28
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Czechia

82019CZ0228(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international and local jurisdiction in a contractual relationship which was resolved by the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’).
A company domiciled in the Czech Republic (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) entered into contract with a company domiciled in Croatia (hereinafter ‘the defendant’). According to the contract, the defendant undertook to share 10% of its income with the plaintiff as a remuneration for use of the plaintiff’s software solutions.
The plaintiff filed an action before the Obvodní soud pro Prahu 1 (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’), in which it requested the defendant to provide a list of invoices issued and payments received by the company O2 Czech Republic. The defendant objected, citing the lack of jurisdiction of Czech courts since it has no property, branch, agency or other establishment in the Czech Republic. The Court of First Instance cited the contract between the parties in which they agreed to resolve all possible disputes before the Czech courts, invoked the Brussels I Regulation (1) and held that the jurisdiction of Czech courts is given. However, since the contract did not mention the specific Czech court, the Court of First Instance declared the lack of its local jurisdiction and, pursuant to § 11(3) o.s.ř. (2), referred the case to the Supreme Court to decide which court has jurisdiction over this case.
The Supreme Court recalled that when a court declares the lack of its jurisdiction and refers the case to the Supreme Court pursuant to § 11(3) o.s.ř., the Supreme Court is authorised to assess only the local jurisdiction, not the international jurisdiction. The Supreme Court stated that the defendant is a company domiciled in Croatia, it has no branch or other establishment in the Czech Republic, it neither has any property located in the Czech Republic. The parties did not agree on the jurisdiction of specific courts. Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court ordered that for reasons of economy of procedure it will be the Court of First Instance which will have local jurisdiction in this case.
(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) Občanský soudní řád (Code of Civil Procedure).