PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
I ACz 862/13 (SA w Katowicach)
Details of the court
Poland, Second Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 2
Paragraph 1
Article 3
Paragraph 1
Article 5
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b Indent 2
Article 59
Paragraph 1
Date of the judgement
07 October 2013
Appeal history
None
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The parties entered into a contract for the provision of services, when the defendant company breached the contract, he was sued by the Polish company, in a Polish court. The court of first instance stated that it had no jurisdiction under the provisions of the Brussels I Regulation because the defendant was domiciled in Germany (Art. 2 par. 1 does not apply) and because the performance of the obligation took place in Germany (Art. 5 par. 1(b) does not apply). The applicant appealed against the first-instance judgment and stated that the defendant is domiciled in Poland. She emphasised that the defendant (i) had a bank account in Poland and (ii) had his registered residence in Poland. The court of second instance pointed out that the defendant did not have his domicile in Poland because he lives and performs the medical profession in Germany. In view of the above, the court of second instance confirmed the first-instance judgment.

This website is written and maintained by the University of Aberdeen's Research Applications and Data Management Team