PIL instrument(s)
Brussels I
Case number and/or case name
BGH, 17.10.2007 – XII ZR 146/05
Details of the court
Germany, Third Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 2
Paragraph 1
Article 5
Paragraph 2
Article 24
Article 66
Paragraph 1
Article 76
Date of the judgement
09 July 2007
Appeal history
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The plaintiff claims for maintenance from her divorced husband who is domiciled in France. She claims for the compensation of financial detriments that arose from the so called ‘Begrenztes Realsplitting’ which to some extent allows the spouse to remove the expenses made for maintenance duties from the income tax. The other spouse then has to pay income tax for the maintenance payments. The first instance court assumed the international jurisdiction of German courts and the Higher Regional Court denied it. The Federal Court of Justice held that German courts were internationally competent to rule the case. It stated that the action for compensation of detriments arisen from the ‘Begrenztes Realsplitting’ were a ‘matter relating to maintenance’ within the meaning of Art. 5 no. 2 Brussels I. The decision is correct: the compensation granted by German law obligatorily requires a maintenance relation between the parties. Therefore the maintenance matter is necessarily directly connected with the compensation claim. The fact that the CJEU classifies the prestations compensatoires of French law as a matter relating to maintenance (see C-120/97) also speaks for this interpretation given the point that this claim is mainly based on compensation considerations as it is party the case for the present claim.

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