EUPillar Woutim N.V. v. Matzker KFZ-Technik GmbH - 4187/04

Summary

The claim relates to a Belgian contractor who worked on the building and showroom of a distributor of Land Rover in Germany. The Belgian contractor relies on a choice of forum clause in its general conditions, giving jurisdiction to the Belgian courts. A choice of forum clause may take different forms. It could be a clause in a contract signed by the parties. It is not sufficient, however, for the clause to appear on the back of the document. In this case, the signed text on the front side must refer explicitly to the choice of forum clause on the other side. In the present case, the claimant has drawn up a quotation. Every page of the quotation was signed by the defendant, except for the general conditions of the claimant. The last, signed, page of the quotation contained a general reference to the general conditions, but did not refer specifically to the choice of forum clause lending international jurisdiction to the Belgian courts. The services were supplied in Germany. Article 5(1)(b) does not give jurisdiction to the Belgian courts either. The Commercial Court of Hasselt dismissed the case. Short critique The Court adds a condition to the Segoura case law of the ECJ (the case is not cited by the Court). The ECJ only requires that the document refers to the general terms and conditions on the back, not to the choice of court clause specifically.