Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments — Lis pendens — Proceedings involving the same cause of action — Criteria for assessment — Account taken only of the applicants' claims to the exclusion of the defence submissions — (Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968, Art. 21)

2. Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments — Protocol on the interpretation of the Convention by the Court of Justice — Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Question without sufficient information to indicate how an answer is necessary — Inadmissible — (Brussels Convention of 27 September 1968; Protocol of 3 June 1971)

Summary

1. Article 21 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the accession of the Hellenic Republic, by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic, and by the Convention of 29 November 1996 on the accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden, must be construed as meaning that, in order to determine whether two claims brought between the same parties before the courts of different Contracting States have the same subject-matter, account should be taken only of the claims of the respective applicants, to the exclusion of the defence submissions raised by a defendant.

On the one hand, that provision refers only to the applicants' respective claims in each of the sets of proceedings, and not to the defence which may be raised by a defendant. On the other hand, lis pendens exists from the moment when two courts of different Contracting States are definitively seised of an action, that is to say, before the defendants have been able to put forward their arguments.

see paras 26-27, 32, operative part

2. In the context of the cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts established by the Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, in exceptional circumstances the Court can examine the conditions in which a case has been referred to it by the national court, in order to assess whether it has jurisdiction. The spirit of cooperation which must prevail in the preliminary-ruling procedure requires the national court, for its part, to have regard to the function entrusted to the Court of Justice, which is to assist in the administration of justice in the Member States and not to deliver advisory opinions on general or hypothetical questions.

In order to enable the Court to provide a useful interpretation of Community law, it is essential for the national court to explain why it considers that a reply to its questions is necessary to enable it to give judgment.

A question referred for a preliminary ruling is therefore inadmissible if it does not provide the Court with sufficient information to indicate how an answer to that question is necessary.

see paras 34-35, 37-38, 40-41