Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2410
Date: 2014-12-04
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber), 4 December 2014 1. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Insolvency proceedings — Regulation No 1346/2000 — International jurisdiction to open insolvency proceedings — Action brought in the context of insolvency proceedings — Action brought against the managing director of a company for reimbursement of payments made after the company became insolvent or after it had been established that the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets — Jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings have been opened (Council Regulation No 1346/2000, Art. 3(1)) 2. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Insolvency proceedings — Regulation No 1346/2000 — International jurisdiction to open insolvency proceedings — Action brought in the context of insolvency proceedings — Action brought against the managing director of a company for reimbursement of payments made after the company became insolvent or after it had been established that the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets — Jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings have been opened — Non-applicability of the Lugano II Convention (Council Regulation No 1346/2000, Art. 3(1)) 1. Article 3(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that the courts of the Member State in the territory of which insolvency proceedings regarding a company’s assets have been opened have jurisdiction, on the basis of that provision, to hear and determine an action, brought in the context of insolvency proceedings, by the liquidator of that company against the managing director of that company for reimbursement of payments made after the company became insolvent or after it had been established that the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets. The fact that the national legislation theoretically allows such an action to be brought even where no insolvency proceedings concerning the assets of the debtor company have been opened does not per se preclude such an action being characterised as an action which derives directly from insolvency proceedings and is closely connected with them, providing that that action was actually brought in the context of insolvency proceedings. (see paras 20, 26, operative part 1) 2. Article 3(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that the courts of the Member State in the territory of which insolvency proceedings regarding a company’s assets have been opened have jurisdiction to hear and determine an action, brought in the context of insolvency proceedings, by the liquidator of that company against the managing director of that company for reimbursement of payments made after the company became insolvent or after it had been established that the company’s liabilities exceeded its assets, where the managing director is domiciled not in another Member State but in a contracting party to the Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, signed on 30 October 2007, which was approved on behalf of the Community by Decision 2009/430 (the Lugano II Convention). In so far as an action falls under Article 3(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000, it is excluded from the scope of that convention. (see paras 32, 34, operative part 2)