PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

AG Stuttgart, 4.9.2013 – 28 F 1133/13

Details of the court

Germany, First Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

03 September 2013

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The parties argued about maintenance claims. It was doubtful whether German courts had international competence pursuant to Art. 3 (b) Maintenance Regulation. The court held that Art. 3 (b) Maintenance Regulation applied to public institutions, too. It wasn’t relevant if the claims being brought up were original or had been assigned back to the claimant after the claims had been assigned to the institution by law. It was decisive who was materially entitled to the claim. Art. 2 no. 10 Maintenance Regulation doesn’t oppose this interpretation because it is relevant who substantively is entitled to the claim. It is worth mentioning that the Local Court explicitly differed from the CJEU case law in Blijdenstein (C-433/01) where the Court had stated that a public institution's recourse claim could not be claimed before the courts of the habitual residence of the person being who is deemed to receive maintenance.