EUPillar Buseloc VZW v. Aquadroom BV - 04/1578

Summary

The claim, as described in the writ of summons, concerns outstanding invoices for sales made by a Belgian seller to a Dutch buyer. The claimant does not invoke any general conditions. The claimant argues before the court that it no longer bases its claim on the sales agreement between the parties, but on an acknowledgment of debt made by the defendant. This acknowledgment of debt means that the defendant has an obligation to pay. This obligation to pay should be performed in Belgium where the claimant is domiciled. However, when examining its jurisdiction, the Court needs to take into account the claim as described by the claimant in the original writ of summons. The acknowledgment of debt is therefore not relevant to determine the international jurisdiction of the court. The court applies Art. 5(1)(b). The place of delivery is not in Belgium and therefore the Belgian courts do not have jurisdiction. Finally, the court notes that even if the acknowledgment of debt had been relevant, this would not have granted jurisdiction to the Belgian courts. The acknowledgment of debt does not in itself mean that the defendant agreed that this debt was to be paid at the domicile of the claimant. In principle, since the applicable law is Belgian law, debts have to be paid at the debtor’s place of residence, which would have led to the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts. Short critique The Court correctly states that when examining its jurisdiction, the Court needs to take into account the claim as described by the claimant in the original writ of summons. (cf. C-38/81, Effer/Kantner judgment of the ECJ).