PIL instrument(s)
Brussels IIa
Case number and/or case name
III C 2898/13 (SO w Lublinie)
Details of the court
Poland, First Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels IIa
Article 1
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Article 16
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b
Article 19
Paragraph 1
Date of the judgement
25 May 2014
Appeal history
None
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
In the current case, the plaintiff filed an application for divorce. However, the Polish court found that the Italian defendant had earlier brought the proceedings relating to separation before an Italian court. The Polish court stayed the proceedings of its own motion on the basis of Article 19 par. 1 of the Brussels II bis Regulation. The Polish court pointed out that, according to the judgement of the Third Chamber court, decided on 16 July 2009, in case C-168/08, if the defendant does not claim that he or she was not served with the document instituting the proceedings, but he or she enters an appearance, it should be considered that the court was seised correctly according to Article 16 of the Brussels II bis Regulation. The Polish court found that the plaintiff certainly received the document instituting the proceedings before the Italian court – she submitted a letter to the Italian court in order to justify her absence.

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