PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

Olympic NV v. Carlo Kneip - 04/2348 - Kh. Hasselt, 15 September 2004

Details of the court

Belgium, First Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

14 September 2004

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The claim is concerned with the unpaid purchase price of about 7 sales made by a Belgian seller to a Luxembourg seller. The general conditions on the invoice stipulate in both Dutch and French that only the courts of Hasselt (Belgium) have jurisdiction. The defendant fails to enter an appearance. The court examines its jurisdiction ex officio, in application of Art. 26(1) Brussels I. (The defendant had submitted written conclusions to the Court in French, which the Court is prohibited from taking into account.) No other transaction between the parties than the one underpinning the current dispute has been proven. This is insufficient to establish a long-term commercial relationship or a practice between the parties. Art. 23 Brussels I cannot be applied. The Court examines the applicability of Art. 5(1) Brussels I. The claimant shows that in the case of about 4 invoices the goods have been picked up in Belgium. However, pursuant to Art. 63(1) Brussels I, a person domiciled on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg and sued in the court of another Member State pursuant to Article 5(1) may refuse to submit to the jurisdiction of that court if the final place of delivery of the goods or provision of the services is in Luxembourg. Since the claimant does not claim that the goods, which were picked up in Belgium, did not end up in Luxembourg, the Belgian courts do not have jurisdiction.