PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
V ACz 877/12 (Sąd Apelacyjny w Katowicach)
Details of the court
Poland, Second Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 23
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b
Date of the judgement
26 December 2012
Appeal history
None
CJEU's case law cited by the court
None
Summary
The Polish company sued a German company for payment, but the court of first instance stated that it had no jurisdiction under Brussels I Regulation. As a result, the plaintiff appealed against the first-instance judgment and argued that the parties had concluded the agreement conferring jurisdiction to the Polish courts. The appellant emphasised that, according to Art. 23 par. 1 letter a, such an agreement can be concluded in the form which accords with practices which the parties have established between themselves. The defendant disagreed with the plaintiff and stated that the parties had never come to an agreement. The court of second instance found that the person who represented the German company in economic relations had no authorisation to conclude an agreement conferring jurisdiction; It follows that there was no agreement conferring jurisdiction. The court pointed out that the Brussels I Regulation contains provisions concerning only the form of such an agreement, while the applicable law governs other issues. In this case, the issues concerning the power of attorney are governed by German law. The appellate court pointed out that, according to German provisions, the person who represented the German company did not have the special type of power of attorney necessary to conclude an agreement conferring jurisdiction.

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