Summary
The plaintiff filed an action for damages and the defendant, a Danish company, contested the jurisdiction of the Polish courts. The court of first instance stated that it had no jurisdiction under Brussels I Regulation. As a result, the plaintiff lodged an appeal and emphasised that according to Art. 1 par. 3 of the Brussels I Regulation, the provisions of this regulation shall not be applied. The court of second instance pointed out that on 19 October 2005 the EU concluded an agreement with Denmark on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements in civil and commercial matters that extended the provisions of the Brussels I Regulation to that country. According to Art. 9 of this agreement it shall apply only to legal proceedings instituted and to documents formally drawn up or registered as authentic instruments after the entry into force thereof. Subsequently, the appellate court found that if the case is relating to the delict, the courts of the place where the harmful event occurred shall have jurisdiction. In view of the fact that the harmful event (unlawful seizure of vehicle) took place in Denmark, the Danish courts shall have jurisdiction. Finally, the court of second instance stated that the jurisdiction of the Polish courts cannot be established on the basis of Art. 24 of the Brussels I Regulation, this is because the defendant entered an appearance only in order to contest the jurisdiction.