Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2007:740
Date: 2007-11-29
Language of the case: Swedish
Court formation: Third Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Concepts: Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments – Matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Sweden

Summary of the Judgment Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility – Regulation No 2201/2003 – Jurisdiction in divorce proceedings (Council Regulation No 2201/2003, Arts 3(1)(a), 6, 7(1) and 17) Articles 6 and 7 of Regulation No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility are to be interpreted as meaning that where, in divorce proceedings, a respondent is not habitually resident in a Member State and is not a national of a Member State, the courts of a Member State cannot base their jurisdiction to hear the petition on their national law, if the courts of another Member State have jurisdiction under Article 3 of that regulation. According to the clear wording of Article 7(1) of Regulation No 2201/2003, it is only where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 3 to 5 of the regulation that jurisdiction is to be governed, in each Member State, by the laws of that State. Moreover, according to Article 17 of Regulation No 2201/2003, where a court of one Member State is seised of a case over which it has no jurisdiction under that regulation and a court of another Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to that regulation, it is to declare of its own motion that it has no jurisdiction. That interpretation is not affected by Article 6 of Regulation No 2201/2003, since the application of Articles 7(1) and 17 of that regulation depends not upon the position of the respondent, but solely on the question whether the court of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 3 to 5 of the regulation, the objective of which is to lay down uniform conflict of law rules for divorce in order to ensure a free movement of persons which is as wide as possible. Consequently, Regulation No 2201/2003 applies also to nationals of non‑Member States whose links with the territory of a Member State are sufficiently close, in keeping with the grounds of jurisdiction laid down in that regulation, grounds which are based on the rule that there must be a real link between the party concerned and the Member State exercising jurisdiction. (see paras 18-19, 21, 25-26, 28, operative part)