Audiencia Provincia Barcelona ; 2019-06-27; ROJ AAP B 5663/2019
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:ES:APB:2019:5663A
Date: 2019-06-27
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters;Lugano Convention
Origin: Spain

82019ES0627(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international jurisdiction in a conciliation procedure brought before the Audiencia Provincia Barcelona (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’).
A company domiciled in Spain (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) made a claim within a conciliation procedure before the Juzgado Primera Instancia nº 22 de Barcelona (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) concerning a real property located in Barcelona against a Swiss company in bankruptcy (hereinafter ‘the defendant’). The Court of First Instance invoked Article 140 of the LJV (1), held that the exclusive jurisdiction over this dispute shall be based on the domicile of the person being sued, pointed to the foreign domicile of the defendant in the present case and, by its order, declared the lack of jurisdiction of the Spanish courts to hear the case. The further plaintiff’s appeal to this order was dismissed and the lack of jurisdiction was confirmed.
Subsequently, the plaintiff appealed before the Court of Appeal alleging an erroneous assessment of the situation by the Court of First Instance, a wrong application of national law and an omission to apply the new Lugano Convention (2) to this case. The LJV in Article 9(1) provides that Spanish judicial bodies must respect jurisdiction based on international agreements or other international instruments. The new Lugano Convention is one of such international instruments, and its Article 22(1) clearly provides that ‘in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property or tenancies of immovable property’ the exclusive jurisdiction shall lie with ‘the courts of the State […] in which the property is situated’. Moreover, the exclusive jurisdiction of the Spanish courts in disputes regarding property located in Spain stems also from Spanish legislation (e.g. Article 22 of the LOJ (3)).
The Court of Appeal recalled that it was neither the substantive nor the local jurisdiction which was disputed here, but the international jurisdiction instead. Therefore, Article 9 of the LJV must be respected and the provisions of international treaties and/or instruments should take precedence over those provided by national law. The conciliation procedure may also be governed by the legislative framework set for the assessment of international jurisdiction. Since the property in question is located in Barcelona, Spain, the jurisdiction of the Spanish courts is well justified and must be established on the basis of provisions cited by the plaintiff in its appeal.
The appeal was granted, the first instance order was annulled and the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance to hear this dispute was established.
(1) Ley de la Jurisdicción Voluntaria (Law on Voluntary Jurisdiction).
(2) Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
(3) Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial (Law on the Judiciary).