Oberster Gerichtshof; 2024-03-25; 2 Nc 16/24m
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:AT:OGH0002:2024:0020NC00016.24M.0325.000
Date: 2024-03-25
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Austria

82024AT0325(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, referred to the Oberster Gerichtshof (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’), concerns the jurisdiction in inheritance matters.
A cousin (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) of the deceased, who resided in Austria and died in 2021, seeks to assert her statutory right of inheritance for EUR 84 904.60 against another cousin of the deceased (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) residing in Germany.
The entire estate was awarded to the defendant in Austrian statutory probate proceedings, as the plaintiff’s relationship to the deceased was unknown to the probate court commissioner, which led to her exclusion from the proceedings.
The plaintiff requested the Supreme Court to designate a locally competent court in Austria pursuant to Section 28(1)(1) of the JN (1), as the defendant had no domicile, habitual residence or assets in Austria. With regard to the international jurisdiction of Austrian courts, the plaintiff relied on Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 (2).
The Supreme Court referred to Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, according to which ‘The courts of the Member State in which the deceased had his habitual residence at the time of death shall have jurisdiction to rule on the succession as a whole’. As the deceased resided in Austria, the Supreme Court confirmed that the Austrian courts have exclusive international jurisdiction over the succession dispute. Although the Regulation determines international jurisdiction, it does not regulate local jurisdiction within Member States. Article 2 of the Regulation states that local jurisdiction remains subject to national law.
The Supreme Court held that the general jurisdiction of the probate court under Section 77 of the JN is no longer applicable because the probate proceedings have been concluded. The defendant also lacks a jurisdictional connection to Austria as provided for in Sections 66(1) and (2) of the JN (no domicile or habitual residence) or Section 99 of the JN (no assets in Austria). No other provision of the JN directly suggests the locally competent court. In this case, the Supreme Court recalled that Section 28 of the JN provides for a discretionary power to choose the most appropriate local court.
The Supreme Court granted the plaintiff’s application. As the probate proceedings had been conducted before the Bezirksgericht Reutte, the Supreme Court designated the Landesgericht Innsbruck as the court with local jurisdiction for the proceedings on the inheritance claim, which was justified by the proximity of the probate proceedings and by considerations of efficiency and connection with the matter.
(1) Law on Court Jurisdiction (Jurisdiktionsnorm).
(2) Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession.