KG Berlin; 2016-10-07; 23 U 30/16
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:DE:KG:2016:1007.23U30.16.00
Date: 2016-10-07
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Germany

82016DE1007(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
The plaintiff (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) applied for the issuance of the certificate of enforceability under Article 53 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1) relating to a court payment order issued in his favour by the Landgericht Berlin (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) which had been declared to be preliminarily enforceable against the provision of a security amounting to 110 % of the amount subject to the enforcement. The proceedings regarding the appeal of the defendant (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) are still pending.
The judicial officer (Rechtspflegerin) rejected this application of the plaintiff claiming that it could not be confirmed that the judgment was enforceable in Germany without meeting any other conditions, as it was enforceable only against the provision of a security which the plaintiff failed to provide.
The plaintiff filed an objection (Erinnerung) against this decision stating that the enforcement was planned for Poland and the Polish law did not operate with the provision of a security.
The judicial officer (Rechtspflegerin) in charge of issuing the respective certificate did not agree with the objection (Erinnerung) and referred the matter to the senate of the Kammergerichts Berlin (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’).
The Court of Appeal found that the judicial officer (Rechtspflegerin) decided correctly.
It was the intention of the law makers that a decision issued in a second state cannot have a bigger effect than in the first state. With respect to the enforceability, this principle presents solely a condition precedent and not a prevention of the enforcement itself. The Court of Appeal shared this opinion.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the objection (Erinnerung) of the plaintiff against this decision of the judicial officer (Rechtspflegerin). An appeal is admissible as the case is of substantial legal importance and the decision of an appellate court is necessary to achieve a unanimous court jurisdiction.
(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.