Gerechtshof ‘s-Hertogenbosch; 2018-11-27; Appellant; 200 233 139
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2018:4903
Date: 2018-11-27
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Netherlands

82018NL1127(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
Gerechtshof ’s-Hertogenbosch - 27 November 2018 - ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2018:4903
Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1)
The plaintiff contracted the defendant to build a house. During 2017, the work was stopped. The plaintiff filed an action for a preliminary injunction seeking to order the defendant to resume the work. The defendant alleged the lack of jurisdiction of the Dutch courts since the General Terms and Conditions of their contract contained a jurisdiction clause in favour of the Belgian courts.
In the preliminary injunction proceedings, the Court of First Instance held that the defendant sufficiently proved the relevance of the jurisdiction clause of the General Terms and Conditions. The Court of First Instance invoked Article 25 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) and declared the jurisdiction clause valid since it was agreed in writing. As the Belgian courts have jurisdiction according to this clause, the Court of First Instance declared the lack of its jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Gerechtshof’s-Hertogenbosch (Court of Appeal) reached a different opinion. As the plaintiff was a consumer, it results from Articles 17, 18 and 19 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) that the Dutch courts have jurisdiction based on the plaintiff’s domicile.
The first instance judgment was annulled, and the Dutch courts were declared as having the jurisdiction to hear this case. The case was referred back to the Court of First Instance for further proceedings.
(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.