PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
LG Düsseldorf, 5.6.2008 – 4a O 27/07
Details of the court
Germany, First Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 4
Paragraph 1
Article 27
Paragraph 1
Article 28
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 3
Article 34
Paragraph 3
Date of the judgement
04 June 2008
Appeal history
None
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The plaintiff, a subsidiary of an American company, brought an action because of an alleged violation of a patent. The court had to consider its obligation to stay proceedings pursuant to Art. 27 (1) Brussels I. At that point of time an action concerning the violation of the same patent was already pending before a Belgian court. In that case however the plaintiff was the formerly registered owner of the patent, the American parent company. The court held that – regarding the former action in Belgium - the present action didn’t concern ‘the same cause of action’ ‘between the same parties’ within the meaning of Art. 27 (1) Brussels I. The present action concerned another plaintiff than the action pending before the Belgian court. The plaintiff didn’t assert assigned claims transferred by the parent company. The action for injunction was an independent claim originally belonging to the subsidiary. The subsidiary is a judicially independent entity and therefore can’t be considered as the same party as its parent company. Therefore the requirements of Art. 27 (1) Brussels I weren’t given. The court’s judgment is correct.

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