Gerechtshof Arnhem-Leeuwarden; 2015-02-17; Osmos Benelux;BIM Systems B.V.; 200.157.027-01
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:NL:GHARL:2015:1152
Date: 2015-02-17
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Netherlands

82015NL0217(52)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
ECLI:NL:GHARL:2015:1152
Jurisdiction of Dutch courts in provisional measures
The contractual choice of court, set to Commercial Court of Gent (Belgium), does not preclude the Dutch District Court from performing provisional measures as referred to in Article 31 of the Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters ("Brussels I Regulation"). The Dutch District Court is competent on the basis of Article 6a of the Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering (Code of Civil Procedure, Rv). Claims are, according to the Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), governed by Belgian law. The suspension-related claims based on the contract as well as the claim for retention are also governed by Belgian law. Regulation (EC) No 864/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the law applicable to non-contractual obligations (Rome II) is not applicable because there are no additional facts or circumstances indicating that the appellant, regardless of the contractual relationship, acted unlawfully against the respondent. The urgent interest was examined ex nunc. The claim was rejected ex nunc. The claim, examined ex tunc, was found urgent and justified at the time of the verdict.