Nejvyšší soud České republiky; 2014-12-17; 30 Nd 207/2014
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2014:30.ND.207.2014.1
Date: 2014-12-17
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Czechia

82014CZ1217(52)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
A Czech insurance company (hereinafter “the plaintiff”) concluded an insurance agreement with ‘M.F.’ (hereinafter “the defendant”) whose place of residence was stated to be in Germany and his postal address was stated to be in the Czech Republic. The plaintiff sued the defendant for outstanding payments.
The Court of First Instance found that the post sent to defendant remained unreceived, he did not reside or stay on this (Czech) address and he was not even listed in the Central evidence of inhabitants. Therefore, the Court of First Instance declared the lack of its jurisdiction to hear this case and asked the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter “the Supreme Court”) to decide which Czech court had the jurisdiction in this case.
The Supreme Court held, on the principle of economy of the proceedings, that the jurisdiction to hear and decide this case belongs to the court where the proceedings were initiated.
However, the Supreme Court indicated that this dispute was the subject of the application of Article 12(1) of the Brussels I Regulation (1). As the last known defendant’s residence was in Germany, the Czech courts did not have the jurisdiction to make a final decision in this case, which is underlined by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (2). The Supreme Court further pointed out on the application of Article 22, Article 24 and Sections 3 to 5 of the Chapter II of the Brussels I Regulation. The Court of First Instance must take into consideration these provisions and if it decides that Czech courts lack the jurisdiction, it must inform the defendant of this fact at the time of delivery of the action filed against him.
(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.(2) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 17 November 2011, Hypoteční banka a.s. v Udo Mike Lindner, C-327/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:745, paragraphs 38 to 47.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 15 March 2012, G v Cornelius de Visser, C-292/10, ECLI:EU:C:2012:142, paragraphs 39 to 42.