EUPillar D. v D. - Mons, 27 June 2006

Summary

On 17 January 2006, the appellant initiated divorce proceedings before the Tribunal de grande instance in Grenoble, France. He also requested a decision on parental responsibility and rights of access. The Court of Appeal of Mons is therefore the court that is second seised within the meaning of Art. 19 Brussels IIa and must therefore stay the proceedings until the Tribunal de grande instance of Grenoble establishes jurisdiction. However, in urgent cases, the provisions of this Regulation shall not prevent the courts of a Member State from taking such provisional, including protective, measures in respect of persons or assets in that State as may be available under the law of that Member State, even if, under this Regulation, the court of another Member State has jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter (Art. 20 Brussels IIa). The measures requested by the parties are of a temporary nature, since they seised the court in summary proceedings on the basis of Art. 584 Belgian Judicial Code. In the document instituting the proceedings, the parties do not justify the urgency of the case. However, the court deems that it can implicitly deduce the urgency of the situation from the description of the “crisis” the couple is going through. Therefore, the first judge had jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal takes a provisional decision on the custody of the children and the rights of access during the holidays.