Višje sodišče v Ljubljani; 2010-05-12; IV Cp 1064/2010
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:SI:VSLJ:2010:IV.CP.1064.2010
Date: 2010-05-12
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Slovenia

82010SI0512(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case, examined by the Višje sodišče v Ljubljani (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’), concerns a request to transfer jurisdiction in proceedings relating to a minor child abroad.
The Court of First Instance ruled that it had jurisdiction to decide the case concerning the minor child and rejected the defendant’s request to transfer jurisdiction to an Italian court.
The defendant appealed, arguing that the Court of First Instance had misapplied the new Brussels II Regulation (1), contrary to its primary purpose of protecting the interests of the child. The defendant relied on Article 15(3) of the Regulation, which sets out the criteria for determining a child’s connection with a Member State when deciding whether to transfer a case to a court better placed to hear it. The defendant submitted that:
(a)    the plaintiff has most of his assets in Italy, which could be used to enforce future maintenance payments;
(b)    the Italian legal system offers the child a higher level of protection; and
(c)    family proceedings in Italy are faster, as they are given priority.
The Court of Appeal held that:
(a)    the location of the assets in Italy is irrelevant to the determination of the claim. It has not yet been decided to whom the child will be awarded and who will be obliged to pay maintenance. Even if that were already known, the argument presupposes a situation where maintenance would have to be enforced, which is a separate matter. Moreover, under the new Brussels II Regulation, a Slovenian judgment would be recognised and enforceable in Italy;
(b)    the assertion that the Italian legal system offers children greater protection merely expresses a general distrust of the Slovenian legal order; and
(c)    family proceedings in Slovenia are, by their nature, priority cases, and are expressly defined as urgent under the national law.
The Court of Appeal therefore dismissed the appeal as unfounded and upheld the decision of the Court of First Instance.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000.