Gerechtshof’s-Hertogenbosch; 2005-03-04; XX; 200.341.144_01
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2025:594
Date: 2025-03-04
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Netherlands

82025NL0304(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2025:594 the Gerechtshof’s-Hertogenbosch (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’), 04-03-2025, 200.341.144,01
Article 25(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1) – Have the parties agreed on a jurisdiction clause?
XX, a company providing digital learning solutions (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’), supplied products to an Australian company YY (hereinafter ‘the defendant’). The defendant did not pay the invoices. Consequently, the plaintiff initiated proceedings.
The Court of First Instance held that the place of delivery of the goods (touchscreens) was located outside the Netherlands. Therefore, the Court of First Instance declared that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the case. The appeal concerns the question of whether the Dutch courts have jurisdiction on the basis of an agreement conferring jurisdiction contained in the plaintiff’s general terms and conditions.
The Court of Appeal set aside the contested judgment, declared the Court of First Instance had jurisdiction and referred the case to the Rechtbank Oost-Brabant (‘the Court of First Instance of Oost-Brabant’) for a decision on the merits.
3.9.2 If the conditions for jurisdiction are met, as in this case by virtue of a valid agreement conferring jurisdiction, the Dutch court must rule on the case. This applies even if the case has stronger connections with another legal system or if hearing the case before the Dutch court would give rise to certain difficulties.
(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 (recast).