PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
OLG Hamm, 13.11.2006 – 8 U 139/06
Details of the court
Germany, Second Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 5
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph a
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b Indent 1
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph b Indent 2
Paragraph 1 SubParagraph c
Article 22
Paragraph 2
Date of the judgement
12 November 2006
Appeal history
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The parties argued about payment claims regarding one partner’s withdrawal from a company. It was doubtful whether German courts were internationally competent to rule the issue. The first instance court denied the international jurisdiction of German courts. The Higher Regional Court in contrast affirmed it by stating that the scope of application of Art. 22 no. 2 Brussels I wasn’t given if solely one partner left the company without there being a liquidation of the whole company. Further, German courts were internationally competent because the place of performance regarding the contract on the withdrawal from the society was Germany. According to the court this could be assumed in view of the fact that the place of performance according to German substantial law was Germany. The court assumed correctly that the single withdrawal of one partner doesn’t concern the dissolution of a company within the meaning of Art. 22 no. 2 Brussels I. The determination of the place of performance is in accordance with settled case law of the CJEU. The judgment is correct.

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