Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2018:310
Date: 2018-05-08
Language of the case: German
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Austria

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 12 September 2018 1. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Special jurisdiction — Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict — Concept — Action seeking to establish liability not falling within the scope of matters relating to a contract (Council Regulation No 44/2001, Art. 5(3)) 2. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Special jurisdiction — Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place of occurrence of the harmful event — Concept — Place where the damage occurred and place of the event giving rise to it (Council Regulation No 44/2001, Art. 5(3)) 3. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Special jurisdiction — Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place of occurrence of the harmful event — Concept — Place where the damage, in the form of financial loss in the bank account of the applicant, occurred — Exclusion in the absence of any other connecting factors (Council Regulation No 44/2001, Art. 5(3)) 4. Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Special jurisdiction — Jurisdiction in tort, delict or quasi-delict — Tort action brought by an investor against the issuer of a certificate on the basis of the prospectus relating to that certificate — Damage consisting in financial loss which occurred in a bank account of the investor’s with a bank established within the jurisdiction of the courts of the investor’s domicile — Jurisdiction of those latter courts — Conditions (Council Regulation No 44/2001, Art. 5(3)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see para. 19) 2. See the text of the decision. (see para. 22) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 23, 24, 30) 4. Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted to the effect that in a situation, such as that in the main proceedings, in which an investor brings, on the basis of the prospectus relating to a certificate in which he or she invested, a tort action against the bank which issued that certificate, the courts of that investor’s domicile, as the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred within the meaning of that provision, have jurisdiction to hear and determine that action, where the damage the investor claims to have suffered consists in financial loss which occurred directly in that investor’s bank account with a bank established within the jurisdiction of those courts and the other specific circumstances of that situation also contribute to attributing jurisdiction to those courts. (see para. 36, operative part)