Nejvyšší soud; 2019-06-20; 30 Cdo 4402/2017
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:CZ:NS:2019:30.CDO.4402.2017.1
Date: 2019-06-20
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Czechia

82019CZ0620(52)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE summary
JURE summary
This case regards a question of international jurisdiction of the Czech courts considered by the Nejvyšší soud (hereinafter ‘the Supreme Court’).
A natural person domiciled in Slovakia (hereinafter ‘the plaintiff’) suffered injuries from an occupational accident which took place in his habitual place of work in the Czech Republic. There was already a judgment given by the Czech courts ordering the former plaintiff’s employer – a company domiciled in Slovakia (hereinafter ‘the defendant’) - to compensate the plaintiff for pain and suffering. However, the ordered sum was not duly paid.
In the current proceedings, the plaintiff brought a new action against the defendant in which he sought to receive interest for the delay on payment. The Okresní soud v Břeclavi (hereinafter ‘the Court of First Instance’) invoked the Brussels I Regulation (recast) (1) and held that, pursuant to the domicile of the defendant, the jurisdiction belongs to the courts in Slovakia. Moreover, the plaintiff was a citizen of Slovakia domiciled therein. The proceedings were terminated.
The Krajský soud v Brně (hereinafter ‘the Court of Appeal’) confirmed the first instance decision and held that the current claim is a separate from the proceedings in which the Czech courts decided on the compensation. The current claim cannot be subsumed under Section 5 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) providing jurisdictional rules over individual contracts of employment since the claim is more related to tortious conduct of the defendant and not to his role as employer. The first instance conclusion was upheld.
The plaintiff filled a cassation appeal to the Supreme Court arguing that the current claim is closely related to the one already resolved by the Czech courts and therefore the jurisdiction of the Czech courts shall be established. It should be established also on the basis of Article 21(1)(b)(i) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast), according to which ‘an employer … may be sued … in the courts for the place where or from where the employee habitually carries out his work or in the courts for the last place where he did so.’ Such place was in the Czech Republic. Finally, also Article 7(2) suggests that the jurisdiction shall have the ‘courts for the place where the harmful event occurred’. This was again in the Czech Republic.
The Supreme Court cited the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union which provides an interpretation of the concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’ as set out in Article 7(1)(a) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast). This covers all claims arising from a contract including entitlement to compensation of damages. In a case where the plaintiff asserts the right to be paid damages by reason of the wrongful conduct of the other party, the obligation referred to in Article 7(1)(a) of the Brussels I Regulation (recast) is still that which arises under the contract. Similarly, Article 20(1) of the same Regulation uses the wording ‘matters relating to individual contracts of employment’. The CJEU's interpretation of Article 7(1)(a) can be therefore applied to Article 20(1) too. The claim to pay interest for damages unpaid due to wrongful conduct of the defendant might also be governed by jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment.
The Supreme Court held the cassation appeal as founded, annulled the decisions of both lower courts and referred the case back to the Court of First Instance for new hearing. The Supreme Court did not finally resolve the question of whether the Czech courts have jurisdiction over the dispute but ordered the Court of First Instance to asses this question under jurisdictional rules over individual contracts of employment (Section 5 of the Brussels I Regulation (recast)).
(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.