Rechtbank Arnhem, uitspraak van 15/02/2006 135982/KG ZA 06-24 en 136307/KG ZA 06-43
Decision by national courts in the field of European Union law — ECLI:NL:RBARN:2006:AW2069
Date: 2006-02-15
Subject matter: Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Origin: Netherlands

82006NL0215(51)_ENG_SUMJURE
JURE SUMMARY
JURE SUMMARY
The claimant, which has its seat in Sweden, manufactures greeting cards and concluded a franchise agreement regarding their distribution with the defendant, whose seat is in the Netherlands. It accuses the defendant of also distributing greeting cards from other manufacturers. It thereby breached the contract and infringed on trademark rights of the claimant. The claimant obtained an injunction against the defendant in proceedings for provisional relief without an oral hearing from a district judge in Sweden. An appeal on the injunction was unsuccessful. Thereupon, the claimant sought in proceedings for provisional relief before the Rechtbank of Arnhem (NL) for judgment against the defendant in order to obtain compliance with the prohibition. The defendant challenged the jurisdiction of the court and invoked a jurisdiction agreement in the franchise agreement.
The Rechtbank of Arnhem (NL) holds that the jurisdiction agreement expressly provides a forum in the Netherlands in favour of the claimant if it opposes infringement of its trademark rights, as is the case here. However, the Rechtbank refers the claimant to the procedure pursuant to Article 33 et seq. Brussels I Regulation, in which it may have the injunction it has already obtained declared enforceable in the Netherlands. According to the ECJ, the Brussels I Regulation builds upon the mutual trust of the Member States in their respective legal systems and judicial instances. Where a judgment issued in a Member State may be recognised and declared enforceable, this principle forbids holding fresh proceedings in another Member State on an almost identical subject matter. The rapid procedure for a declaration of enforceability also leads to the desired result in this case. Although the defendant was not heard in the proceedings for provisional relief in Sweden at first instance, this defect was cured in the appeal proceedings. The Rechtsbank of Arnhem (NL) dismisses the action as inadmissible.