Case number and/or case name
OLG Frankfurt/Main, 30.3.2005 – 1 W 93/04
Details of the court
Germany, Second Instance
Articles referred to by the court
Brussels I
Article 34
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 4
Article 43
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 5
Article 46
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 3
Date of the judgement
29 March 2005
CJEU's case law cited by the court
Summary
The parties argued about the declaration of enforceability of a Belgian judgment on the maintenance of the former spouse after divorce. It was doubtful whether the judgment could be declared enforceable in view of Art. 34 no. 1.
The court held that a violation of public policy couldn’t be stated even given the case that the foreign judgment was based on the assumption that the spouse being obliged to provide maintenance was to blame for the marriage’s failure. It further stated that the ‘pourvoi en cassation’ of Belgian law was an ‘appeal’ within the meaning of Art. 46 (1) Brussels I.
The CJEU stated in Gambazzi (C-394/07) that a violation of public policy could only be assumed if there was a violation of a fundamental principle of a legal system. Such an essential violation couldn’t be stated in the present case. Therefore the judgment is correct.