REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Quality of petrol and diesel fuel used for road transport in the European Union: Eighth annual report (Reporting year 2009)
Date: 2012-03-23
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air quality, diesel fuel, marketing standard, motor vehicle, petrol, pollution control, quality control of industrial products, quality standard, road transport

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 16.3.2011 
COM(2011) 127 final 

2011/0060 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding 
the property consequences of registered partnerships 

{COM(2011) 125 final} 
{COM(2011) 126 final} 
{SEC(2011) 327 final} 
{SEC(2011) 328 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSAL 

1.1. 

General background 

Article 67(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that the Union is to 
constitute  an  area  of  freedom,  security  and  justice  with  respect  for  fundamental  rights  and  the 
different legal systems and traditions of the Member States. Paragraph 4 of that article lays down 
that  the  Union  is  to  facilitate  access  to  justice,  in  particular  through  the  principle  of  mutual 
recognition  of  judicial  and  extrajudicial  decisions  in  civil  matters.  Article  81  of  the  Treaty 
explicitly  refers  to  measures  aimed  at  ensuring  'the  mutual  recognition  and  enforcement  between 
Member States of judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases' and 'the compatibility of the 
rules  applicable  in  the  Member  States  concerning  conflict  of  laws  and  of  jurisdiction'.  Many 
instruments have already been adopted on this basis, in particular Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003. 
None of them, however, cover the property consequences of registered partnerships. 

The programme on mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters adopted by the 
Council  on  30 November  20001  provided  for  the  drafting  of  legislation  on  jurisdiction  and  the 
recognition and enforcement of decisions as regards 'rights in property arising out of a matrimonial 
relationship and the property consequences of the separation of an unmarried couple'. The Hague 
programme2,  which  was  adopted  by  the  European  Council  on  4  and  5  November  2004,  set  the 
implementation  of  the  mutual  recognition  programme  as  a  top  priority  and  called  on  the 
Commission  to  submit  a  Green  Paper  on  'the  conflict  of  laws  in  matters  concerning  matrimonial 
property  regimes,  including  the  question  of  jurisdiction  and  mutual  recognition',  and  stressed  the 
need to adopt such legislation by 2011. 

The Stockholm Programme, which was adopted by the European Council on 11 December 2009, 
also  states  that  mutual  recognition  should  be  extended  to  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  the 
property consequences of the separation of unmarried couples. 

In the 'EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights', adopted on 
27  October  20103,  the  Commission  identified  uncertainty  surrounding  the  property  rights  of 
international couples as one of the main obstacles faced by EU citizens in their  daily lives when 
they tried to exercise the rights the EU conferred on them across national borders. To remedy this, 
it  announced  that  it  would  adopt  in  2011  a  proposal  for  legislation  to  make  it  easier  for 
international couples (either married or registered partners) to know which courts had jurisdiction 
and which law applied to their property rights. 

1.2. 

Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

The  increased  mobility  of  persons  within  an  area  without  internal  frontiers  leads  to  a  marked 
increase  in  the  number  of  couples,  of  whatever  form,  made  up  of  nationals  of  different  Member 
States who may live in a Member State of which they do not have the nationality and often acquire 
property in more than one Union country. A study carried out by the consortium ASSER-UCL in 

1 
2 
3 

OJ L 12, 15.1.2001, p. 1. 
OJ L 53, 3.3.2005, p. 1. 
COM(2010) 603. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
20034  showed  the  large  number  of  transnational  couples  within  the  Union  and  the  practical  and 
legal  difficulties  such  couples  face,  both  in  the  daily  management  of  their  property  and  in  its 
division  if  the  couple  separate  or  one  of  its  members  dies.  While  marriage  is  the  most  common 
form of couple, new forms of union have emerged, including the registered partnership, by which 
two  people  in  a  stable  relationship  formally  register  their  union  with  a  public  authority.  The 
difficulties encountered by couples in a registered partnership often arise from the great disparities 
between the applicable rules governing the property effects of such unions, both in substantive law 
and in private international law .  

Because of the features that distinguish registered partnerships and marriage, and the different legal 
consequences  resulting  from  these  forms  of  union,  the  Commission  is  presenting  two  separate 
proposals for Regulations: one on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement 
of  decisions  regarding  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships,  and  the  other  on 
jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  in  matters  of 
matrimonial property regimes.  

The  purpose  of  this  proposal  is  to  establish  a  clear  legal  framework  in  the  European  Union  for 
determining  jurisdiction  and  the  law  applicable  to  the  property  consequences  of  registered 
partnerships,  and  to  facilitate  the  movement  of  decisions  and  instruments  among  the  Member 
States. 

2. 

RESULT OF THE CONSULTATIONS – IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Before  this  proposal  was  drawn  up,  a  broad  consultation  exercise  took  place  with  the  Member 
States,  the  other  institutions  and  the  public.  Following  the  2003  study,  on  17 July 2006  the 
Commission  published  a  Green  Paper  on  conflict  of  laws  in  matters  concerning  matrimonial 
property  regimes5,  including  the  question  of  jurisdiction  and  mutual  recognition,  that  launched 
wide-ranging  consultations  on  the  subject.  A  group  of  experts,  PRM/III,  was  set  up  by  the 
Commission to draw up the proposal. The group was made up of experts representing the range of 
professions concerned and the different European legal traditions; it met five times between 2008 
and  2010.  The  Commission  also  held  a  public  hearing  on  28 September  2009  involving  some 
hundred participants; the debates confirmed the need for an EU instrument in this area that covered 
in  particular  applicable  law,  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions.  A 
meeting  with  national  experts  was  held  on  23 March  2010  to  discuss  the  thrust  of  the  proposal 
being drafted. 

Finally,  the  Commission  conducted  a  joint  impact  study  on  the  proposals  for  regulations  on  the 
property consequences of registered partnerships and matrimonial property regimes. It is attached 
to this proposal.  

4 

5 

ASSER-UCL Consortium, Study in comparative law on the rules governing conflicts of jurisdiction and laws 
on matrimonial property regimes and the implementation for property issues of the separation of unmarried 
See: 
couples in the Member States. 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/doc_centre/civil/studies/doc_civil_studies_en.htm 
COM(2006) 400. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
3. 

LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

3.1. 

Legal basis 

The legal basis for this proposal is Article 81(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union, which confers on the Council the power to adopt measures concerning family law having 
cross-border implications after consulting the European Parliament. 

As  with  matrimonial  property  regimes,  property  relationships  between  registered  partners,  and 
between the partners and third parties, derive from the prior existence of the registered partnership. 
The  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships  are  created  by  the  registration  of  the 
partnership  –  just  as  a  matrimonial  regime  is  created  by  marriage  –  and  they  disappear  with  its 
dissolution.  By  registering  their  partnership  with  a  public  authority,  partners  establish  a  stable, 
legally  recognised  relationship  with  each  other.  Most  Member  States  with  legal  provision  for 
partnerships make the rules as similar as possible to those of marriage. 

The  aim  of  this  proposal  is  to  establish  a  comprehensive  set  of  rules  of  international  private  law 
applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships. It therefore touches on matters 
of legal jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions regarding the 
property  consequences  of  a  registered  partnership.  The  rules  proposed  are  concerned  only  with 
cross-border cases. The cross-border requirement in Article 81(3) is consequently fulfilled. 

3.2. 

Subsidiarity principle 

The  only  way  of  achieving  the  proposal's  objectives  is  through  common  rules  on  the  property 
consequences of registered partnerships, rules which must be identical in order to guarantee legal 
certainty  and  predictability  for  citizens.  Unilateral  action  by  Member  States  would  therefore  run 
counter  to  this  objective.  No  international  agreements  are  applicable  here,  other  than  the 
Convention on the recognition of registered partnerships of 5 September 2007 of the International 
Commission on Civil Status. But that Convention covers only the recognition of partnerships, and 
has not entered into force, so it is not likely to offer the solutions needed given the magnitude of the 
problems addressed by this proposal, as revealed by both the impact study and the public hearings. 
Given  the  nature  and  the  scale  of  the  problems  experienced  by  European  citizens,  the  objectives 
can be achieved only at Union level. 

3.3. 

Proportionality principle 

The proposal complies with the principle of proportionality in that it is strictly limited to what is 
necessary  to  achieve  its  objectives.  It  does  not  try  to  harmonise  the  laws  of  the  Member  States 
concerning the property aspects of registered partnerships. Nor does it affect the way in which the 
liquidation of the property of registered partnerships is taxed by Member States. This proposal will 
not  entail  any  financial  or  administrative  burdens  on  citizens  and  only  a  very  limited  additional 
burden on national authorities. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

3.4. 

Impact on fundamental rights 

In  accordance  with  the  strategy  for  the  effective  implementation  of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental 
Rights by the European Union6, the Commission has checked that the proposal complies with the 
rights set out in the Charter. 

It does not affect the right to respect for private and family life nor the right to marry and to found a 
family according to national laws, as provided for in Articles 7 and 9 of the Charter.  

The right to property referred to in Article 17 of the Charter is strengthened. The predictability of 
the  law  applicable  to  all  the  couple's  property  will  in  fact  enable  the  partners  to  exercise  their 
property rights more fully.  

The  Commission  has  also  checked  that  the  proposal  complies  with  Article  21,  prohibiting  any 
discrimination.  

Finally, the proposal would increase citizens' access to justice in the EU, in particular for registered 
partnerships. It would facilitate implementation of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, 
which guarantees the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. By setting out objective criteria 
for determining the court having jurisdiction, parallel proceedings and appeals precipitated by the 
most active party can be avoided. 

3.5. 

Choice of instrument 

The need for legal certainty and predictability calls for clear and uniform rules and requires that the 
legislation take the form of a regulation. The proposed rules on jurisdiction, applicable law and free 
movement of decisions are set out clearly and in detail, requiring no transposition into national law. 
The  objectives  of  legal  certainty  and  predictability  would  be  compromised  if  the  Member  States 
had discretion with regard to implementing the rules. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPACT, SIMPLIFICATION AND CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER UNION POLICIES 

4.1. 

Budgetary impact 

The proposal will have no impact on the Union budget. 

4.2. 

Simplification 

The  harmonisation  of  the  rules  on  jurisdiction  will  greatly  simplify  procedures  by  making  it 
possible  to  determine  the  court  with  jurisdiction  to  deal  with  the  property  consequences  of 
registered  partnerships  on  the  basis  of  common  rules.  If  courts  handling  the  separation  of  the 
partners, or, in application of future EU legislation, a succession case following the death of one of 
the partners, have their jurisdiction over those matters extended to the property consequences of the 
partnership, citizens will be able to have the same court dealing with all aspects of their situation. 

The  harmonisation  of  conflict-of-law  rules  will  considerably  simplify  procedures  by  establishing 
which law is applicable.  

6 

Communication from the Commission, COM(2010) 573 of 19.10.2010. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

                                                 
Finally,  the  rules  proposed  for  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  court  decisions  will  facilitate 
their movement between different Member States. 

4.3. 

Consistency with other Union policies 

This proposal is part of the Commission's efforts to dismantle the obstacles faced by EU citizens in 
their daily lives when they try to exercise the rights the EU confers on them, as outlined in the 2010 
EU Citizenship Report referred to earlier. 

5. 

COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES 

5.1. 

Chapter I: Scope and definitions 

Article 1 

The  personal  effects  of  registered  partnerships  are  specifically  excluded  from  the  scope  of  this 
Regulation,  which  covers  the  property  consequences  of  such  partnerships.  These  property 
consequences relate both to the partners' daily management of their property and to the liquidation 
of the property as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the partners. 

To determine the areas that will be covered it seemed preferable to compile a comprehensive list of 
matters excluded from the Regulation. Thus, matters already covered by existing EU regulations, 
such as maintenance obligations7, especially between partners,  and issues concerning the validity 
and effect of gifts8, will be excluded from the scope of the Regulation. Matters arising from the law 
of succession are also excluded. 

The Regulation does not affect the nature of rights in rem relating to property, the classification of 
property  and  rights,  nor  the  determination  of  the  prerogatives  of  the  holder  of  such  rights.  The 
disclosure of property rights, in particular the functioning of the land register and the effects of an 
entry or failure to make an entry in this register, is also excluded from the scope of the Regulation. 

Article 2 

For the sake of consistency and to facilitate understanding and uniformity of implementation, some 
definitions of terms appearing in this Regulation are common to other EU instruments currently in 
force or under negotiation. 

The  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships,  which  are  the  sole  subject  matter  of  this 
Regulation,  are  given  a  specific  definition  limiting  them  solely  to  existing  property  relationships 
between  the  partners  and  between  the  partners  and  third  parties  arising  from  the  institutionalised 
relationship created by the registration of the partnership.  

The  definition  of  a  'court'  includes  authorities  and  persons  who  exercise  their  functions  by 
delegation or designation of a court, so that their decisions are to be treated as court decisions for 

7 
8 

Governed by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009, OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 
Governed by Regulation (EC) No 593/2008, OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
the  purposes  of  recognition  and  enforcement  in  a  Member  State  other  than  the  State  where  they 
were delivered. 

5.2. 

Chapter II: Jurisdiction 

Legal proceedings over the property consequences of registered partnerships often arise from the 
liquidation of the property when the couple ceases to exist, either as a result of the death of one of 
them or of their separation. 

The aim of this Regulation is to enable citizens to have the related procedures handled by the courts 
of  the  same  Member  State.  To  do  this,  the  Regulation  is  designed  to  ensure  that  the  rules  for 
determining the jurisdiction of the courts called on to deal with the property aspects of registered 
partnerships are in line with the existing or proposed rules in other European legislation. 

Article 3 

The  courts  of  a  Member  State  with  territorial  jurisdiction  to  deal  with  the  liquidation  of  the 
succession of a partner who has died, in accordance with the rules of Regulation (EU) No ... [of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law,  recognition  and 
enforcement of decisions and authentic instruments in matters of succession and the creation of a 
European  Certificate  of  Succession],  should  have  their  jurisdiction  extended  to  include  the 
liquidation of the property relationship of the registered partnership as a result of the opening of the 
succession. 

However, the courts of that Member State will be able to refuse this extension of jurisdiction if the 
domestic law of that State does not provide for the institution of registered partnership. 

Article 4 

Similarly, to ensure that if the partners separate a court seised in a Member State can deal with all 
aspects  of  this  separation  without  forcing  the  partners  to  undertake  different  proceedings  in 
different  States,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  of  a  Member  State  dealing  with  the  dissolution  or 
annulment  of  a  registered  partnership  may,  if  the  partners  agree,  be  extended  to  the  property 
consequences  of  the  registered  partnership  arising  from  the  dissolution  or  annulment  of  the 
partnership.  

Article 5 

The  Regulation  also  provides  for  rules  governing  jurisdiction  that  would  apply  in  other  cases, 
independently of any succession or separation proceedings. To establish the Member State whose 
courts  have  jurisdiction  to  deal  with  proceedings  concerning  the  property  consequences  of 
registered partnerships there would be a list of connecting factors, in order of precedence. 

The  proposed  criteria  include  the  common  habitual  residence  of  the  spouses,  their  last  common 
habitual residence if one of them still resides there or the habitual residence of the defendant. As in 
Articles 3 and 4, the courts of the Member State designated in accordance with the criteria set out 
above may refuse this extension of jurisdiction if the domestic law of that State does not provide 

EN 

7 

   EN 

for  the  institution  of  registered  partnership,  and  the  last  criterion  for  establishing  jurisdiction  in 
Article 5 is the Member State where the partnership was registered. 

Article 6 

Where no Member State has jurisdiction in application of the previous articles, this article makes 
provision  for  establishing  the  Member  State  whose  courts  may  handle  the  case  by  way  of 
exception. This rule ensures access to justice for the partners and interested third parties when the 
property or properties of either partners or of both partners is located on the territory of a particular 
Member State, and also where both partners have the nationality of a particular Member State.  

5.3. 

Chapter III: Applicable law 

Article 15 

In view of the differences between the national laws of those Member States that make provision 
for  registered  partnerships,  the  principle  adopted  in  the  Regulation  is  that  the  property 
consequences of registered partnerships should be governed by the law of the State of registration. 
This  principle  is  in  line  with  the  Member  Sates'  laws  on  registered  partnerships,  which  usually 
provide for application of the law of the State of registration, and do not offer partners the option of 
choosing any law other than the State of registration, even though they may be entitled to conclude 
agreements between themselves. 

This principle ensures the unity of the law applicable to all properties owned by the couple that are 
subject to the property consequences of registered partnerships, whatever their form or location. 

Article 16 

The  conflict-of-law  rule  laid  down  in  the  previous  article  applies  to  all  forms  of  registered 
partnership,  in  whatever  State  they  are  registered,  not  merely  to  partnerships  registered  in  a 
Member State.  

Article 17 

To  take  account  of  the  rules  on  application  needed  in  each  Member  State,  in  particular  those  for 
protection of the family home, this provision allows a Member State to set aside the application of 
a foreign law in favour of its own. Accordingly, to protect the family home, a Member State where 
the home is located may apply its own rules for the protection of the family home. Exceptionally, 
this Member State may apply its own law to all persons living on its territory in 'preference' to the 
partnership contract a person may have concluded in another Member State. 

5.4. 

Chapter IV: Recognition, enforceability and enforcement 

The proposed Regulation provides for the free movement of decisions, authentic instruments and 
court  settlements  concerning  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships.  It  would  thus 
introduce mutual recognition based on the mutual trust arising out of the integration of the Member 
States within the European Union. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

This  free  movement  would  take  the  form  of  a  uniform  procedure  for  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  judgments,  authentic  acts  and  legal  transactions  originating  in  another  Member 
State.  The  procedure  replaces  the  national  procedures  currently  in  force  in  the  different  Member 
States. The grounds for non-recognition or refusal to enforce are also harmonised at European level 
or reduced to the absolute minimum. They replace the varied, and often broader, grounds that exist 
at national level at present. 

Decisions  

The  proposed  rules  on  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  are  in  line  with  those 
proposed  for  successions.  They  therefore  refer  to  the  exequatur  procedure  existing  in  civil  and 
commercial  matters.  So  any  decision  of  a  Member  States  would  be  recognised  in  other  Member 
States without any special procedure. To have a decision enforced, applicants would have to follow 
a  uniform  procedure  in  the  State  of  enforcement  to  obtain  a  declaration  of  enforceability.  The 
procedure is unilateral and is initially confined to a verification of documents. Only at a later stage, 
if  the  defendant  objects,  would  the  judge  proceed  to  consider  possible  grounds  for  refusal.  This 
offers adequate protection of the rights of defendants. 

These  rules  are  a  major  step  forward  compared  with  the  present  situation.  At  present,  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  is  governed  by  the  Member  States'  national  laws,  or 
bilateral  agreements  between  some  Member  States.  The  procedures  to  be  followed  vary  with  the 
Member  States  concerned,  as  do  the  documents  required  for  obtaining  a  declaration  of 
enforceability and the grounds on which foreign judgments may be rejected.  

As was explained earlier, this Regulation is a first step in the area of the property consequences of 
registered partnerships and it concerns family law (see point 3.1). Given the specific circumstances, 
the free movement of judgments is subject to the exequatur procedure as currently laid down in the 
Brussels I Regulation9.  

Nevertheless,  the  removal  of  intermediate  proceedings  (exequatur)  could,  as  in  other  areas,  be 
considered  after  an  evaluation  of  the  rules  in  this  Regulation  and  the  development  of  judicial 
cooperation on the property consequences of registered partnerships.  

The acts of authorities exercising their powers by delegation or designation in accordance with the 
definition  of  a  court  in  Article  2  of  this  Regulation  will  be  treated  as  court  decisions  and  thus 
covered by the provisions on recognition and enforcement under this chapter 

Authentic instruments 

Given the practical importance of authentic documents for the property consequences of registered 
partnerships and in order to ensure the consistency of this Regulation with other EU instruments, 
this Regulation should ensure their recognition for the purposes of their free movement.  

This recognition means that they will enjoy the same evidentiary effect in respect of the contents of 
the recorded instrument and the facts contained therein and the same presumption of authenticity 
and enforceability as in the country of origin.  

9 

OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

                                                 
5.5. 

Chapter V: Effects in respect of third parties 

These provisions are designed to ensure that legal certainty for the partners in their relations with 
third parties is reconciled with the protection of third parties against the application of a rule they 
could not have known or foreseen. Member States are therefore given the possibility, in cases of 
transactions  between  a  partner  and  a  third  party  residing  on  their  territory,  of  providing  that  the 
partner may not rely on the rules applicable to the property consequences of the partnership unless 
those rules had been disclosed there, or the third party was aware of them or ought to have been 
aware of them.  

EN 

10 

   EN 

2011/0058 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of 
the property consequences of registered partnerships 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 81(3) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament10, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee11, 

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions12, 

Acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure,  

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of 
freedom,  security  and  justice  in  which  the  free  movement  of  persons  is  ensured.  For  the 
gradual establishment  of such an area, the  Union must adopt measures relating to judicial 
cooperation in civil matters having cross-border implications. 

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Tampere  on  15  and  16  October  1999  endorsed  the 
principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions of judicial authorities as 
the  cornerstone  of  judicial  cooperation  in  civil  matters  and  invited  the  Council  and  the 
Commission to adopt a programme of measures to implement that principle. 

On  30  November  2000  the  Council  adopted  a  draft  programme  of  measures  for 
implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial 
matters13. The programme identifies measures relating to the harmonisation of conflict-of-
law  rules  that  will  facilitate  the  mutual  recognition  of  judgments.  It  provides  for  the 

10 
11 
12 
13 

OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ L 12, 15.1.2001, p. 1. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

development  of  one  or  more  mutual-recognition  instruments  in  matters  of  matrimonial 
property regimes and the property consequences of the separation of unmarried couples.  

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Brussels  on  4  and  5  November  2004  adopted  a  new 
programme entitled 'The Hague Programme: strengthening freedom, security and justice in 
the European Union'14. In this programme the Council asked the Commission to present a 
Green  Paper  on  conflicts  of  law  in  matters  concerning  matrimonial  property  regimes, 
including the question of jurisdiction and mutual recognition. The programme also stressed 
the need to adopt an instrument in this area by 2011. 

On 17 July 2006 the Commission adopted the Green Paper on the conflict of laws in matters 
concerning matrimonial property regimes, including the question of jurisdiction and mutual 
recognition15.  This  Green  Paper  launched  wide  consultations  on  all  aspects  of  the 
difficulties  faced  by  couples  in  Europe  when  it  comes  to  the  liquidation  of  their  common 
property  and  the  legal  remedies  available.  The  Green  Paper  also  addressed  all  issues  of 
private  international  law  encountered  by  couples  in  unions  other  than  marriage,  including 
couples with registered partnerships, and issues specific to them. 

The  Stockholm  programme  of  200916,  which  directs  the  Commission's  work  programme 
from 2010 to 2014, also states that mutual recognition should be extended to the property 
consequences of the separation of couples. 

In  the  'EU  Citizenship  Report  2010:  Dismantling  the  obstacles  to  EU  citizens’  rights', 
adopted  on  27  October  201017,  the  Commission  announced  it  would  adopt  a  proposal  for 
legislation  to  eliminate  the  obstacles  to  the  free  movement  of  persons,  in  particular  the 
difficulties experienced by couples in managing or dividing their property. 

The  specific  features  of  these  two  forms  of  union,  namely  marriage  and  registered 
partnerships,  and  the  resultant  differences  in  the  principles  applicable  to  them,  are  the 
grounds  for  enacting  two  separate  instruments  containing  the  provisions  governing 
matrimonial property regimes and those governing the property consequences of registered 
partnerships, which are the subject of this Regulation.  

The way in which forms of union other than marriage are recognised in the Member States' 
legislation  differs  from  one  State  to  another,  and  a  distinction  must  be  drawn  between 
couples  whose  union  is  institutionally  sanctioned  by  the  registration  of  their  partnership 
with a public authority and couples in de facto cohabitation. While some Member States do 
make provision for such de facto unions, they must be considered separately from registered 
partnerships, which have an official character that makes it possible to take account of their 
specific  features  and  lay  down  rules  on  the  subject  in  Union  legislation.  To  ensure  the 
smooth  functioning  of  the  internal  market,  barriers  to  the  free  movement  of  people  who 
have entered into a registered partnership need to be eliminated, particularly those creating 
difficulties for such couples in the administration and division of their property. In order to 
achieve these objectives, this Regulation brings together in one instrument the provisions on 

14 
15 
16 

17 

OJ L 53, 3.3.2005, p. 1. 
COM(2006) 400. 
'The  Stockholm  Programme  —  An  open  and  secure  Europe  serving  and  protecting  citizens',  OJ C 115, 
4.5.2010, p. 1. 
COM(2010) 603. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

                                                 
jurisdiction,  applicable  law,  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  and  authentic 
instruments, and reliance on the property relationships arising from registered partnerships 
in dealings with third parties. 

(10)  The  Regulation  covers  matters  arising  from  the  property  consequences  of  registered 
partnerships.  'Registered  partnership'  is  defined  here  solely  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Regulation.  The  actual  substance  of  the  concept  is  defined  in  the  national  laws  of  the 
Member States. 

(11)  The  scope  of  the  Regulation  should  extend  to  all  civil  matters  in  relation  to  the  property 
consequences  of  registered  partnerships,  both  the  daily  management  of  the  partners' 
property and its liquidation, in particular as a result of the couple's separation or the death of 
one of the partners. 

(12)  As  the  maintenance  obligations  between  registered  partners  are  provided  for  in  Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No 4/2009  of  18  December  2008  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law, 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  and  cooperation  in  matters  relating  to 
maintenance  obligations18,  they  must  be  excluded  from  the  scope  of  this  Regulation,  as 
should  issues  relating  to  the  validity  and  effects  of  gifts  covered  by  Regulation  (EC) 
No 593/2008  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  17  June  2008  on  the  law 
applicable to contractual obligations19. 

(13) 

Issues  relating  to  the  nature  of  rights  in  rem  that  may  exist  under  the  national  law  of 
Member States, and those linked to the disclosure of such rights, should also be excluded 
from the scope of this Regulation, as they are in Regulation (EU) No ... [of the European 
Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement 
of  decisions  and  authentic  instruments  in  matters  of  succession  and  the  creation  of  a 
European  Certificate  of  Succession]20.  This  means  that  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  in 
which a property of one or both partners is located may take measures under property law, 
regarding  such  things  as  the  recording  of  a  transfer  of  the  property  in  the  public  register, 
where the law of that Member State so provides.  

(14)  To  facilitate  the  proper  administration  of  justice  and  the  liquidation  of  the  property  of 
couples  in  a  registered  partnership  following  the  death  of  one  of  the  partners,  matters 
relating to the property consequences of the registered partnership arising from death will 
be dealt with by the courts of the Member State with jurisdiction over the succession of the 
deceased partner, as laid down in Regulation (EU) No ... [of the European Parliament and 
of  the  Council  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law,  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions 
and  authentic  instruments  in  matters  of  succession  and  the  creation  of  a  European 
Certificate of Succession].  

(15)  Similarly, this Regulation must provide for extension of the jurisdiction of the courts of a 
Member  State  handling  an  application  for  dissolution  or  annulment  of  a  registered 
partnership  to  include  matters  relating  to  the  property  consequences  of  the  registered 
partnership arising in connection with that application, if the partners so agree. 

18 
19 
20 

OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 
OJ L 177, 4.7.2008, p. 6. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

                                                 
(16) 

In  other  situations,  this  Regulation  must  protect  the  territorial  jurisdiction  of  a  Member 
State's  courts  to  deal  with  claims  relating  to  the  property  consequences  of  the  registered 
partnership  in  accordance  with  a  list  of  criteria  listed  in  order  of  precedence  designed  to 
ensure  the  existence  of  a  close  link  between  the  partners  and  the  Member  State  whose 
courts have jurisdiction. Courts other than those of the Member State where the partnership 
was  registered  may  decline  this  extension  of  jurisdiction  if  their  domestic  law  does  not 
provide  for  registered  partnerships.  Finally,  if  no  court  has  jurisdiction  to  deal  with  the 
situation in the light of the other provisions of this Regulation, an alternative jurisdictional 
rule has been included to avoid any risk of denial of justice. 

(17)  The  proper  functioning  of  justice  requires  that  irreconcilable  decisions  should  not  be 
pronounced in two different Member States. To this end, this Regulation should provide for 
general rules of procedure based on Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 
2001  on  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  judgments  in  civil  and 
commercial matters21. 

(18)  To facilitate the partners' management of their property, the law of the Member State where 
the partnership was registered will apply to all the partners' property, even if this law is not 
the law of a Member State.  

(19)  To facilitate the application of one Member State's law by another Member State's courts, 
the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters set up by Council Decision 
2001/470/EC  of  28  May  200122  can  help  inform  the  courts  about  the  substance  of  the 
foreign law. 

(20)  Considerations of public interest may, in exceptional circumstances, justify the courts of the 
Member States invoking overriding mandatory provisions which must be complied with in 
order to safeguard the political, social or economic organisation of those States. Similarly, 
in  exceptional  circumstances,  the  courts  of  the  Member  States  should  be  allowed  to  set 
aside  the  foreign  law  in  a  given  case  where  its  application  would  be  manifestly 
incompatible with the public policy of the forum. 

(21)  However, the courts must not be able to invoke overriding mandatory provisions or public 
policy as exceptions in order to set aside the law of another Member State or to refuse to 
recognise or enforce a decision, an authentic instrument, a legal transaction or a European 
Certificate of Succession drawn up in another Member State where application of such an 
exception would be contrary to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 
and  in  particular  Article  21,  which  prohibits  all  forms  of  discrimination.  Nor  may  these 
courts set aside the law applicable to registered partnerships merely on the grounds that the 
public policy of the forum does not recognise registered partnerships. 

(22)  Since  there  are  States  in  which  two  or  more  systems  of  law  or  sets  of  rules  concerning 
matters  governed  by  this  Regulation  coexist,  there  should  be  a  provision  governing  the 
extent to which this Regulation applies in the different territorial units of those States. 

(23)  Since  mutual  recognition  of  decisions  rendered  in  the  Member  States  is  one  of  the 
objectives  of  this  Regulation,  this  Regulation  must  lay  down  rules  on  the  recognition  and 

21 
22 

OJ L 12, 16.1.2001, p. 1. 
OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 25. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

                                                 
enforcement  of  decisions  on  the  basis  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  44/2001,  adjusted  where 
necessary  to  meet  the  specific  requirements  of  matters  covered  by  this  Regulation. 
Therefore  it  should  not  be  possible  in  a  Member  State  to  refuse  the  recognition  and 
enforcement, in whole or in part, of a decision concerning the property consequences of a 
registered  partnership  if  that  Member  State's  national  law  does  not  recognise  such 
partnerships or provides for different consequences with regard to the property. 

(24) 

In  order  to  take  into  account  different  ways  of  dealing  with  matters  of  the  property 
consequences  of  registered  partnerships  in  the  Member  States,  this  Regulation  must 
guarantee  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  authentic  instruments.  Nevertheless,  the 
authentic instruments cannot be treated as court decisions with regard to their recognition. 
The recognition of authentic instruments means that they enjoy the same evidentiary effect 
with regard to their contents and the same effects as in their Member State of origin, and a 
presumption of validity which may be rebutted if they are contested. 

(25)  While  the  law  applicable  to  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships  must 
govern the legal relationship between a partner and a third party, the conditions for relying 
on that law should be regulated by the law of the Member State of habitual residence of the 
partner  or  the  third  party,  in  the  interests  of  the  third  party's  protection.  The  law  of  that 
Member State may thus provide that the partner may invoke the law of his or her property 
regime against the third party only if the conditions of registration or disclosure laid down 
in that Member State have been complied with, unless the third party was aware or ought to 
have  been  aware  of  the  law  applicable  to  the  property  consequences  of  the  registered 
partnership. 

(26)  Given  the  international  commitments  entered  into  by  the  Member  States,  this  Regulation 
should not affect international conventions to which one or more Member States are party 
when  it  is  adopted.  Consistency  with  the  general  objectives  of  this  Regulation  requires, 
however, that the Regulation take precedence over the conventions between Member States.  

(27)  The  objectives  of  this  Regulation,  namely  the  free  movement  of  persons  in  the  European 
Union,  the  opportunity  for  partners  to  arrange  their  property  relations  in  respect  of 
themselves and others during their life as a couple and when liquidating their property, and 
greater  predictability  and  legal  certainty,  cannot  be  sufficiently  achieved  by  the  Member 
States  and  can  therefore,  by  reason  of  the  scale  and  effects  of  this  Regulation,  be  better 
achieved at European Union level; under the principle of subsidiarity enshrined in Article 5 
of the Treaty on European Union, therefore, the Union has competence to act. In accordance 
with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go 
beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. 

(28)  This  Regulation  respects  fundamental  rights  and  observes  the  principles  recognised  in  the 
Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  European  Union,  in  particular  Articles  7,  9,  17,  21 
and 47 concerning, respectively, respect for private and family life, the right to marry and to 
found  a  family  according  to  national  laws,  property  rights,  the  prohibition  of  any  form  of 
discrimination and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. The Member States' 
courts must apply this Regulation in a manner consistent with these rights and principles. 

(29) 

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom 
and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to the Treaty on 
European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, [the United 

EN 

15 

   EN 

Kingdom  and  Ireland  have  given  notice  of  their  wish  to  take  part  in  the  adoption  and 
application  of  this  Regulation]/[without  prejudice  to  Article  4  of  the  Protocol,  the  United 
Kingdom and Ireland will not participate in the adoption of this Regulation and will not be 
bound by it or be subject to its application].  

(30) 

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of the Protocol on the position of Denmark, annexed to 
the Treaty on European Union and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 
Denmark will not participate in the adoption of this Regulation and is not therefore bound 
by it or required to apply it, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Chapter I 

Scope and definition 

Article 1 
Scope 

1. 

2. 

3. 

This  Regulation  shall  apply  to  matters  of  the  property  consequences  of  registered 
partnerships.  

It shall not apply in particular to revenue, customs or administrative matters. 

In  this  Regulation,  'Member  State'  means  any  Member  State  with  the  exception  of 
Denmark, [the United Kingdom and Ireland]. 

The following are excluded from the scope of this Regulation:  

(a) 

the personal effects of registered partnerships, 

(b) 

the capacity of partners, 

(c)  maintenance obligations, 

(d)  gifts between partners, 

(e) 

the succession rights of a surviving partner, 

(f) 

companies set up between registered partners, 

(g) 

the nature of rights in rem relating to a property and the disclosure of such rights. 

For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:  

Article 2 
Definitions 

EN 

16 

   EN 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

(g) 

(h) 

'property consequences': the set of rules concerning the property relationships of the 
(a) 
partners, between themselves and in respect of third parties, resulting from the link created 
by the registration of the partnership; 

'registered partnership': regime governing the shared life of two people which is provided 
for in law and is registered by an official authority; 

'authentic instrument': an instrument which has been officially drawn up or registered as 
an authentic instrument in the Member State of origin and the authenticity of which:  

(i) 

relates to the signature and the content of the authentic instrument, and 

(ii)  has  been  established  by  a  public  authority  or  other  authority  empowered  for  that 

purpose; 

'decision':  any  decision  given  in  a  matter  of  the  property  consequences  of  a  registered 
partnership by a court of a Member State, whatever the decision may be called, including 
the terms 'decree', 'judgment', 'order' or 'writ of execution', and the determination of costs 
or expenses by an officer of the court; 

'Member State of origin': the Member State in which, as the case may be, the decision was 
given,  the  partnership  contract  concluded,  the  authentic  instrument  or  the  instrument 
liquidating  the  common  property  or  any  other  instrument  produced  by  or  before  the 
judicial authority or authority of delegation was drawn up; 

'Member State addressed': the Member State in which recognition and/or enforcement of 
the  decision,  partnership  contract,  authentic  instrument,  instrument  of  liquidation  of  the 
common property or any other instrument produced by or before the judicial authority or 
authority of delegation is requested; 

'court': any competent judicial authority in the Member States which carries out a judicial 
function  in  matters  of  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships  or  any  other 
non-judicial  authority  or  person  carrying  out,  by  delegation  or  designation  by  a  judicial 
authority of a Member State, the functions falling within the jurisdiction of the courts as 
provided for in this Regulation;  

'court  settlement’:  a  settlement  relating  to  the  property  consequences  of  a  registered 
partnership which has been approved by a court or concluded before a court in the course 
of proceedings. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

Chapter II 

Jurisdiction 

Article 3 
Jurisdiction in the event of the death of one of the partners 

1. 

2. 

The  courts  of  a  Member  State  seised  by  an  application  concerning  the  succession  of  a 
registered  partner  under  Regulation  (EC)  ...  [of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law,  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  and 
authentic instruments in matters of succession and the creation of a European Certificate 
of Succession] shall also have jurisdiction to rule on matters of the property consequences 
of the partnership arising in connection with the application. 

The court may decline jurisdiction if its law does not recognise the institution of registered 
partnership.  The  court  with  jurisdiction  shall  then  be  established  in  accordance  with 
Article 5. 

Article 4 
Jurisdiction in cases of separation of the partners 

The courts of a Member State seised by an application for dissolution or annulment of a registered 
partnership  shall  also  have  jurisdiction,  if  the  partners  so  agree,  to  rule  on  the  property 
consequences arising in connection with the application.  

Such an agreement may be concluded at any time, even during the proceedings. If it is concluded 
before the proceedings, it must be drawn up in writing and dated and signed by both parties. 

Failing agreement between the partners, jurisdiction is governed by Article 5. 

Article 5 
Jurisdiction in other cases 

1. 

In  cases  other  than  those  provided  for  in  Articles  3  and  4,  jurisdiction  to  rule  on 
proceedings  concerning  the  property  consequences  of  a  registered  partnership  shall  lie 
with the courts of the Member State: 

(a) 

of the partners' common habitual residence, or failing that, 

(b)  of  the  last  common  habitual  residence  if  one  of  them  still  resides  there,  or  failing 

that 

(c) 

of the defendant's habitual residence, or failing that, 

(d)  of registration of the partnership. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

2. 

The courts referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 may decline jurisdiction if 
their law does not recognise the institution of registered partnership. 

Article 6 
Subsidiary jurisdiction 

Where no court has jurisdiction under Articles 3, 4 or 5, or the court designated by those provisions 
has declined jurisdiction, the courts of a Member State shall have jurisdiction in so far as: 

(a) 

(b) 

property or properties of one or both partners are located in the territory of that Member 
State, but in that event the court seised shall have jurisdiction to rule only in respect of the 
property or properties in question; 

both partners are nationals of that Member State or, in the case of the United Kingdom and 
Ireland, have their common 'domicile' there.  

Article 7 
Forum necessitatis 

Where  no  court  of  a  Member  State  has  jurisdiction  under  Articles 3,  4,  5  or 6,  or  the  court 
designated  by  those  provisions  has  declined  jurisdiction,  the  courts  of  a  Member  State  may, 
exceptionally  and  if  the  case  has  a  sufficient  connection  with  that  Member  State,  rule  on  the 
property  consequences  of  a  registered  partnership  if  proceedings  would  be  impossible  or  cannot 
reasonably be brought or conducted in a third State.  

Article 8 
Counterclaim 

The court seised pursuant to Articles 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 before which proceedings are pending shall also 
have jurisdiction to rule on a counterclaim if it falls within the scope of this Regulation. 

A court shall be deemed to be seised: 

Article 9 
Seising a court 

(a) 

(b) 

on the date when the document instituting  the proceedings or an  equivalent document is 
lodged  with  the  court,  provided  that  the  plaintiff  has  not  subsequently  failed  to  take  the 
steps he or she was required to take to have service effected on the defendant, or 

where the document has to be served before being lodged with the court, on the date on 
which  it  is  formally  drawn  up  or  registered  by  the  authority  responsible  for  service, 
provided  that  the  applicant  has  not  subsequently  failed  to  take  the  steps  he  or  she  was 
required to take to have the document lodged with the court. 

EN 

19 

   EN 

Article 10 
Examination as to jurisdiction 

Where  a  court  of  a  Member  State  is  seised  of  a  case  concerning  the  property  consequences  of  a 
registered partnership over which it has no jurisdiction under this Regulation, it shall declare of its 
own motion that it has no jurisdiction. 

Article 11 
Examination as to admissibility 

Where  a  defendant  habitually  resident  in  a  Member  State  other  than  the  Member  State 
where  the  action  was  brought  does  not  enter  an  appearance,  the  court  with  jurisdiction 
shall  be  responsible  for  staying  the  proceedings  until  it  be  shown  that  the  defendant  has 
been able to receive the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document 
in time to defend himself or herself or that all necessary steps have been taken to this end. 

Article  19  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1393/2007  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  13 November  2007  on  the  service  in  the  Member  States  of  judicial  and 
extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters23 shall apply in place of paragraph 
1 of this article if the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document had 
to be sent from one Member State to another pursuant to that Regulation. 

Where  Regulation  (EC)  No  1393/2007  is  not  applicable,  Article  15  of  the  Hague 
Convention  of  15 November  1965  on  the  service  abroad  of  judicial  and  extrajudicial 
documents  in  civil  or  commercial  matters  shall  apply  if  the  document  instituting  the 
proceedings  or  an  equivalent  document  had  to  be  transmitted  abroad  pursuant  to  that 
Convention. 

Article 12 
Lis pendens 

Where proceedings involving the same cause of action and between the same parties are 
brought  before  courts  of  different  Member  States,  any  court  other  than  the  court  first 
seised shall of its own motion stay its proceedings until such time as the jurisdiction of the 
court first seised is established.  

In the cases referred to in paragraph 1 the first court seised shall establish its jurisdiction 
within six months, unless this proves impossible because of exceptional circumstances. At 
the request of any other court seised of the case, the court first seised shall inform it of the 
date on which it was seised and whether it has established its jurisdiction over the case or, 
failing that, inform it of the estimated time needed to establish its jurisdiction. 

If the jurisdiction of the court first seised is established, any court other than the court first 
seised shall decline jurisdiction in favour of that court. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2 

3. 

23 

OJ L 324, 10.12.2007, p. 79. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

                                                 
Article 13 
Related actions 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Where  related  actions  are  pending  before  courts  of  different  Member  States,  any  court 
other than the court first seised may stay its proceedings. 

Where these actions are pending at first instance, any court other than the court first seised 
may  also,  on  the  application  of  one  of  the  parties,  decline  jurisdiction  if  the  court  first 
seised  has  jurisdiction  over  the  actions  in  question  and  its  law  permits  the  consolidation 
thereof. 

For the purposes of this article, actions are deemed to be related where they are so closely 
connected  that  it  is  expedient  to  hear  and  determine  them  together  to  avoid  the  risk  of 
irreconcilable judgments resulting from separate proceedings. 

Article 14 
Provisional, including protective, measures 

Provisional,  including  protective,  measures  provided  for  by  the  law  of  a  Member  State  may  be 
requested  from  the  courts  of  that  State,  even  where,  under  this  Regulation,  the  courts  of  another 
Member State have jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. 

Chapter III 

Applicable law 

Article 15 
Determination of the applicable law 

The law applicable to the property consequences of registered partnerships is the law of the State in 
which the partnership was registered. 

Article 16 
Universal nature of the conflict-of-law rule 

Any law determined in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter shall apply even if it is not 
the law of a Member State. 

Article 17 
Overriding mandatory provisions 

The  provisions  of  this  Regulation  shall  be  without  prejudice  to  the  application  of  imperative 
provisions  the  upholding  of  which  is  regarded  as  crucial  by  a  Member  State  for  safeguarding  its 
public interests, such as its political, social or economic organisation, to such an extent that they are 

EN 

21 

   EN 

applicable to any situation falling within their scope, irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to 
the property consequences of a registered partnership under this Regulation. 

Article 18 
Public policy 

1. 

2. 

The application of a rule of the law determined by this Regulation may be refused only if 
such application is manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the forum. 

The application of a rule of the law determined by this Regulation may not be regarded as 
contrary to the public policy of the forum merely on the grounds that the law of the forum 
does not recognise registered partnerships. 

Article 19 
Exclusion of renvoi 

Where  this  Regulation  provides  for  the  application  of  the  law  of  a  State,  it  means  the  rules  of 
substantive law in force in that State other than its rules of private international law. 

Article 20 
States with two or more legal systems — territorial conflicts of laws  

Where  a  State  comprises  several  territorial  units, each  of  which  has  its  own  system  of  law  or  its 
own set of rules concerning matters governed by this Regulation:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

any reference to the law of that State shall be construed, for the purposes of determining 
the law applicable under this Regulation, as a reference to the law in force in the relevant 
territorial unit;  

any  reference  to  habitual  residence  in  that  State  shall  be  construed  as  a  reference  to 
habitual residence in a territorial unit;  

any reference to nationality shall refer to the territorial unit determined by the law of that 
State, or, in the absence of relevant rules, to the territorial unit chosen by the parties or, in 
absence  of  such  a  choice,  to  the  territorial  unit  with  which  the  spouse  or  spouses  has  or 
have the closest connection.  

EN 

22 

   EN 

Chapter IV 

Recognition, enforceability and enforcement 

SECTION 1 

DECISIONS 

Subsection 1 

Recognition 

Article 21 
Recognition of decisions 

1. 

2. 

3. 

A  decision  given  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  in  the  other  Member  States 
without any special procedure being required. 

Any  interested  party  who  raises  the  recognition  of  a  decision  as  the  principal  issue  in  a 
dispute may, in accordance with the procedures set out in Articles [38 to 56] of Regulation 
(EC) No 44/2001, apply for the decision to be recognised. 

If  the  outcome  of  the  proceedings  in  a  court  of  a  Member  State  depends  on  the 
determination  of  an  incidental  question  of  recognition,  that  court  shall  have  jurisdiction 
over that question. 

Article 22 
Grounds for non-recognition of decisions 

A decision shall not be recognised if: 

(a) 

(b) 

such recognition is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed; 

where  it  was  given  in  default  of  appearance,  if  the  defendant  was  not  served  with  the 
document  which  instituted  the  proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in  sufficient 
time and in such a way as to enable him or her to arrange for his or her defence, unless the 
defendant failed to commence proceedings to challenge the decision when it was possible 
for him or her to do so; 

(c) 

it  is  irreconcilable  with  a  decision  given  in  a  matter  between  the  same  parties  in  the 
Member State addressed; 

EN 

23 

   EN 

 
(d) 

1. 

2. 

it  is  irreconcilable  with  an  earlier  decision  given  in  another  Member  State  or  in  a  third 
State involving the same cause of action and between the same parties, provided that the 
earlier  decision  fulfils  the  conditions  necessary  for  its  recognition  in  the  Member  State 
addressed. 

Article 23 
Prohibition of review of jurisdiction of the court of origin 

The jurisdiction of the court of the Member State of origin may not be reviewed. 

The  public  policy  criterion  referred  to  in  Article  18  shall  not  apply  to  the  rules  on 
jurisdiction set out in Articles 3 to 8.  

Article 24 
Differences in applicable law 

The  recognition  and  enforcement  of  a  decision,  in  whole  or  in  part,  concerning  the  property 
consequences of a registered partnership may not be refused merely on the grounds that the law of 
the Member State addressed does not recognise registered partnerships or does not accord them the 
same property consequences. 

Article 25 
No review as to substance 

Under no circumstances may a foreign decision be reviewed as to its substance. 

Article 26 
Stay of proceedings 

A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought of a decision given in another Member 
State may stay the proceedings if an ordinary appeal against the decision has been lodged. 

Subsection 2 

Enforcement 

Article 27 
Enforceability of decisions 

Decisions given and enforceable in a Member State and court settlements shall be enforced in the 
other Member States in accordance with Articles [38 to 56 and 58] of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. 

EN 

24 

   EN 

SECTION 2 

AUTHENTIC INSTRUMENTS AND COURT SETTLEMENTS 

Article 28 
Recognition of authentic instruments 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

Authentic  instruments  drawn  up  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  in  the  other 
Member States, unless their validity is disputed in accordance with the applicable law, and 
provided such recognition is not manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State 
addressed. 

The recognition of authentic instruments confers on them evidentiary effect with regard to 
their contents and a presumption of validity. 

Article 29 
Enforceability of authentic instruments 

Authentic instruments drawn up and enforceable in one Member State shall, on request, be 
declared enforceable in another Member State following the procedure set out in Articles 
[38 to 57] of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001. 

The court with which an appeal is lodged under Articles [43 and 44] of Regulation (EC) 
No 44/2001  may  refuse  or  revoke  a  declaration  of  enforceability  only  if  enforcement  of 
the instrument is manifestly contrary to public policy in the Member State addressed. 

Article 30 
Recognition and enforceability of court settlements 

Court  settlements  that  are  enforceable  in  the  Member  State  of  origin  shall  be  recognised  and 
declared enforceable in another Member State at the request of any interested party under the same 
conditions as authentic instruments. The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article [42 or 
44]  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 44/2001  may  refuse  or  revoke  a  declaration  of  enforceability  only  if 
enforcement  of  the  court  settlement  is  manifestly  contrary  to  public  policy  in  the  Member  State 
addressed. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

Chapter V 

Effects in respect of third parties 

Article 31  
Effects in respect of third parties  

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

The  property  consequences of  a registered  partnership for a legal relationship between a 
partner and a third party are governed by the law of the State where the partnership was 
registered in accordance with Article 15.  

However,  the  law  of  a  Member  State  may  provide  that  the  law  applicable  may  not  be 
relied on by a partner in dealings with a third party if one or other of the partners or the 
third  party  has  their  habitual  residence  in  the  territory  of  that  Member  State  and  the 
conditions  of  disclosure  or  registration  provided  for  in  the  law  of  that  State  are  not 
satisfied,  unless  the  third  party  was  aware  of  or  ought  to  have  been  aware  of  the  law 
applicable to the property consequences of the registered partnership. 

The law of the Member State in which immovable property is located may provide for a 
similar rule to that laid down in paragraph 2 in respect of the legal relationship between a 
partner and a third party in respect of that property. 

Chapter VI 

General final provisions 

Article 32 
Relations with existing international conventions 

This Regulation shall not affect the application of the bilateral or multilateral conventions 
to which one or more Member States are party at the time of adoption of this Regulation 
and  which  relate  to  the  subjects  covered  by  this  Regulation,  without  prejudice  to  the 
obligations of the Member States under Article 351 of the Treaty. 

Notwithstanding  paragraph  1,  this  Regulation  shall,  between  Member  States,  take 
precedence over conventions which relate to subjects governed by this Regulation and to 
which the Member States are party. 

Article 33 
Information made available to the public and the relevant authorities 

1. 

The Member States shall send the Commission, no later than ..., in the official language(s) 
they judge appropriate:  

(a) 

a description  of  their national legislation and procedures relating to the law on the 
property consequences of registered partnerships, and the relevant texts;  

EN 

26 

   EN 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

(b) 

the  national  provisions  on  the  effects  in  respect  of  third  parties  referred  to  in 
Article 31(2) and (3). 

Member  States  shall  notify  the  Commission  of  any  subsequent  changes  in  this 
information.  

The Commission shall make all information communicated in accordance with paragraphs 
1  and  2  publicly  available  by  appropriate  means,  in  particular  through  the  multilingual 
internet site of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters.  

Article 34 
Review clause 

No  later  than  [five  years  after  the  date  of  application...],  and  every  five  years  thereafter, 
the Commission shall present to the European Parliament, the Council and the European 
Economic  and  Social  Committee  a  report  on  the  application  of  this  Regulation.  Where 
necessary, the report shall be accompanied by proposals to amend this Regulation. 

To  that  end,  the  participating  Member  States  shall  communicate  to  the  Commission 
relevant information on the application of this Regulation by their courts. 

Article 35 
Transitional provisions 

Chapters II and IV of this Regulation shall apply to legal proceedings instituted, authentic 
instruments received, court settlements concluded and decisions given after the date of its 
application. 

However, if the proceedings in the Member State of origin were instituted before the date 
of  application  of  this  Regulation,  decisions  given  after  that  date  shall  be  recognised  and 
enforced in accordance with Chapter IV as long as the rules of jurisdiction applied comply 
with those set out in Chapter II. 

3. 

Chapter III shall apply only to partners who have registered their partnership.  

Article 36 
Entry into force 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

This Regulation shall apply from [one year after the date of its entry into force]. 

EN 

27 

   EN 

This  Regulation  shall  be  binding  in  its  entirety  and  directly  applicable  in  the  Member  States  in 
accordance with the Treaties.  

Done at […] 

For the Council 
The President  

EN 

28 

   EN