Nejvyšší soud; 2018-09-26; 30 Nd 27/2018
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2018:30.ND.27.2018.1
Date: 2018-09-26
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters;Lugano Convention
Origin: Czechia

82018CZ0926(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a dispute between a Russian national domiciled in the Czech Republic (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) and a Georgian national domiciled in Switzerland (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) over an interest-free loan, which was not repaid by the defendant in due time. The court in Horgen, Switzerland ruled that the defendant is obliged to pay his debt, but the defendant filed (in the Switzerland) a counter-action seeking to annul the plaintiff’s entitlement to the payment.
By virtue of Article 31 of the new Lugano Convention (1), the plaintiff applied before the Czech courts for provisional measures to freeze the defendant’s property in Switzerland to secure his claim. At the same time, the plaintiff asked the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’) to decide which Czech court shall have jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Supreme Court recalled that Article 31 of the new Lugano Convention must be interpreted in compliance with its previous case law as well as with the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, according to which ‘the granting of provisional or protective measures ... is conditional on, inter alia, the existence of a real connecting link between the subject-matter of the measures sought and the territorial jurisdiction of the ... court before which those measures are sought’ (2). The Supreme Court considered that such a real connecting link cannot be established in the present case as the plaintiff sought to freeze property in Switzerland, which cannot be influenced by Czech jurisdiction. In this respect, the fact that the plaintiff is domiciled in the Czech Republic is irrelevant.
The Supreme Court decided that the case belongs to the jurisdiction of the Okresní soud v Karlových Varech, which, as the Court of First Instance, must assess all conditions of the proceedings afresh, including the international competence of the Czech courts, as the Court of First Instance will not be bound by these findings of the Supreme Court.
(1) Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
(2) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 November 1998, Van Uden Maritime BV, trading as Van Uden Africa Line v Kommanditgesellschaft in Firma Deco-Line and Another, C-391/95, ECLI:EU:C:1998:543.