Case C-99/24, Chmieka: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 July 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Koszalinie – Poland) – G.M.K.-Z.B.M. v S.O. (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Article 66 – Scope ratione temporis – Legal proceedings instituted by a claimant – Issue of an order for payment – Statement of opposition by the defendant to that order for payment seeking a review of the case concerned – Regulation (EU) No 44/2001 – Article 5(3) – Jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict – Article 6(1) – More than one defendant – Article 22(1) – Exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property or tenancies of immovable property – Action for payment of compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property situated in a Member State – Defendant domiciled in another Member State)
Date: 2025-07-10
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: appeal, civil proceedings, claim, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, real property, residence








C_202504723EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/4723


8.9.2025






Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 July 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Koszalinie – Poland) – G.M.K.-Z.B.M. v S.O.


(Case C-99/24,
                (1)
Chmieka
                (2)
)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 66 - Scope ratione temporis - Legal proceedings instituted by a claimant - Issue of an order for payment - Statement of opposition by the defendant to that order for payment seeking a review of the case concerned - Regulation (EU) No 44/2001 - Article 5(3) - Jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict - Article 6(1) - More than one defendant - Article 22(1) - Exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property or tenancies of immovable property - Action for payment of compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property situated in a Member State - Defendant domiciled in another Member State)
(C/2025/4723)
Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy w Koszalinie

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: G.M.K.-Z.B.M.

Defendant: S.O.

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 66(1) of 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
must be interpreted as meaning that for the purpose of establishing the applicability ratione temporis of that regulation, legal proceedings are considered to be instituted, within the meaning of that provision, on the date on which the applicant brought his or her action, in a case in which there was subsequently a judgment, and not on the date on which the defendant, at a later stage, lodged a statement of opposition against that judgment seeking a review of the case.










2.


Article 5(3), Article 6(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 22(1) 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 as meaning that:






—


legal proceedings for payment of compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property after the termination of the tenancy agreement relating to that immovable property, which is situated in a Member State other than the one in which the defendant concerned is domiciled, do not constitute an action ‘in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property’ and do not come within the concept of ‘tenancies of immovable property’, within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 22(1);










—


a claim for compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property must be considered as coming within ‘matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict’, within the meaning of Article 5(3); and










—


Article 6(1) is applicable only where, on the date an action is brought by which an applicant sued several defendants before the court of a Member State, there is the same situation of fact and law so that it is expedient to hear and determine all the claims brought against those defendants at the same time to avoid the risk of irreconcilable judgments resulting from separate proceedings were those claims to be determined separately in different Member States.










(1)  OJ C, C/2024/3310.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4723/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)