EUPillar OLG Koblenz, 25.6.2007

Summary

The parties argued on the defendant’s obligation to pay damages because the defendant, a Spanish cooperative society selling wine, has delivered products which contained inadmissible additives to the plaintiff, a German company. The first instance court assumed the international jurisdiction of German courts. The Higher Regional Court confirmed this judgment. It stated that the place where the harmful event occurred/may occur within the meaning of Art. 5 Brussels I was in case of placing wine on the market also the place of storage and processing. Further, the international jurisdiction didn’t depend on the actual presence of damage claims. It was sufficient that the tort has been consistently claimed. The plaintiff wasn’t able to process the wine in his storage rooms. The damage of the tort therefore occurred in Germany since the plaintiff was going to suffer the financial loss by not being able to sell the products stored in Germany. Further, it is settled case law that the claims solely have to be substantially demonstrated in order to establish the venue of Art. 5 no. 3 Brussels I. Therefore, the judgment is correct.