PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

BGH, 8.3.2012 – IX ZB 144/10

Details of the court

Germany, Third Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

07 March 2012

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The parties were involved in enforcement proceedings. It was doubtful whether a judgment could be recognized by German courts or if such a recognition would be contrary to the rule in Art. 34 no. 4 Brussels I. There were two judgments of Romanian courts that had to be taken into consideration. The court stayed the proceedings in order to obtain a preliminary ruling by the CJEU concerning the question: Does Art. 34 no. 4 Brussels I also include the case that two incompatible judgments were made in the same Member State? In German literature the question is not considered uniformly. There’s an opinion saying that the rule solely applies to relations where there are three countries involved. It is however also said that it was sufficient when there were two incompatible decisions if one of them should be declared enforceable in one country. The CJEU has answered the question in C-157/12 (26/9/2013): Article 34(4) Brussels I must be interpreted as not covering irreconcilable judgments given by courts of the same Member State.