Nejvyšší soud; 2019-05-15; 30 Nd 362/2018
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2019:30.ND.362.2018.1
Date: 2019-05-15
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Czechia

82019CZ0515(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international, material and local jurisdiction of the Czech courts resolved by the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’).
A company domiciled in the Czech Republic (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) brought an action against a company domiciled in Poland (hereinafter ‘defendant 1’) and a company domiciled in Malta (hereinafter ‘defendant 2’) for breach of contract for the sale of shares. As part of the contract, the parties concluded an agreement conferring jurisdiction in favour of the Czech courts pursuant to all conditions laid down by Article 25(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1), while at the same time there was no exclusive jurisdiction established pursuant to Article 24 of the same Regulation.
The plaintiff brought the action directly before the Supreme Court and pursuant to § 11(3) of the o. s. ř. (2) asked the Supreme Court to decide which Czech court shall have local jurisdiction to hear the case (since the agreement conferring jurisdiction did not mention the specific court, both defendants were domiciled outside the Czech Republic and none of them had its branch or other property situated in the Czech Republic).
In its statement to the plaintiff’s action, defendant 1 confirmed the existence of an agreement conferring jurisdiction and expressed no objections concerning the application of the Brussels I Regulation (recast).
The Supreme Court confirmed the jurisdiction of the Czech court pursuant to the Brussels I Regulation (recast) and held that pursuant to § 9(2)(e) of the o. s. ř. the dispute falls within the material jurisdiction of the ‘krajské soudy’ (regional courts). The local jurisdiction shall lie with the Městský soud v Praze (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’). The reason was that the registered office of the plaintiff as well as the legal representative of defendant 1 lie in the territorial jurisdiction of this Court of First Instance.
(1) Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
(2) Občanský soudní řád (Code of Civil Procedure).