EUPillar LG Düsseldorf, 10.2.2009

Summary

The plaintiff made a declaration before a Belgian court saying she voluntarily renounced the cross-border issues of the claim. That took place in a different proceeding in 2006. This declaration has been affirmed in a legally binding declaratory judgment by the Belgian court in 2008. The plaintiff brought an action before the German Regional Court concerning injunction, declaration and financial reporting. The Regional Court held that a judgment of a Member State Court regarding procedural aspects according to Art. 33 Brussels I had the same effects as a domestic judgment. If the plaintiff declared a procedural renunciation in a Member State (here: Belgium, Art. 821 belgian code judiciaire) Art. 33 Brussels I was applicable. This was valid if the declaration had a procedural effect in the sentencing State and the renunciation had been followed by the dismissal of the action. The range of the renunciation declaration had to be determined in accordance with the judgment’s tenor. Art. 33 Brussels I aims for a recognition of Member State courts’ judgments that avoids changings in these judgments. Restrictions of this principle regarding the features of the procedural law of the other Member State shouldn’t be made. The prohibition of an examination of the judgment as regards content doesn’t allow limiting the effects of renunciation to Belgium jurisdiction. Therefore the judgment is correct.