EUPillar OLG Zweibrücken, 29.9.2009

Summary

The plaintiff, a German limited company, claimed for damages from a traffic accident in Switzerland where its lorry had been damaged. The defendant is a French liability insurer. The Regional Court confirmed the international jurisdiction at the plaintiff’s registered office (Germany). The Higher Regional Court confirmed the Regional Court’s decision. The court held that German courts had international jurisdiction pursuant to Art. 9 (1) (b), 11 (2) Brussels I. The rules were applicable even if the injured person was a legal entity. The Regulation didn’t differentiate between persons and legal entities. The court further stated that the international jurisdiction wasn’t given if the injured person had special expertise and didn’t need special protection. The wording of the Regulation doesn’t differentiate between persons and legal entities. Further, the CJEU stated in Vorarlberger Gebietskrankenkasse (C-347/08) that Art. 9 Brussels I had to be interpreted as meaning that a social security institution, acting as the statutory assignee of the rights of the directly injured party in a motor accident, may not bring an action directly in the courts of its Member State of establishment against the insurer of the person allegedly responsible for the accident, where that insurer is established in another Member State. This indicates that the relevant point is whether the plaintiff has special expertise. The mere fact that the plaintiff is a legal entity can’t indicate a special knowledge or a lack in need of protection. The judgment therefore is correct.