PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
BGH, 1.2.2011 – KZR 8/10
Details of the court
Germany, Third Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 2
Paragraph 1
Article 5
Paragraph 3
Article 6
Paragraph 2
Article 27
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Article 60
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph c
Date of the judgement
31 January 2011
Appeal history
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The plaintiff brought an action concerning a negative declaration saying that he wasn’t obliged to omit the sale of stationery and foils which the defendant had complained about. The Regional Court denied the international jurisdiction of German courts. The court made a preliminary request concerning the question whether Art. 5 no. 3 Brussels I had to be interpreted in a way that an action for a negative declaration, seeking to establish the absence of liability in tort or delict, falls within the scope of that provision. The question was answered by the CJEU in 2012 (C-133/11). The CJEU stated that Point (3) of Art. 5 Brussels I must be interpreted as meaning that an action for a negative declaration seeking to establish the absence of liability in tort, delict, or quasi-delict falls within the scope of that provision [see paragraph 56 of the judgment].

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