EUPillar NV Crops v Novia Gida Urunleri dis ticaret Ltd Sirketi

Summary

The plaintiff requests the appointment of an expert to investigate the quality and the conformity of the semi-sundried tomato slices and semi-sundried tomato cubes delivered by the defendant. These goods are located in Kortrijk (Belgium). The defendant contests the jurisdiction of the Belgian Courts, because the service was not done in accordance with a previous decision of 27 June 2012 and because the contract between the parties stipulated the exclusive applicability of the conditions of the Hamburger Warenverein, which implicates that the jurisdiction lies with the Arbitration Kamer WarenVerein van de Börse van Hamburg, or the Courts of Hamburg, depending on the choice of the seller. According to the president of the Court, Art. 10 of the Belgian Code on Private International Law was inspired by Art. 31 of Regulation 44/2001. Therefore it is an independent ground of jurisdiction, which is applicable irrespective of the nature or the object of the case. Moreover the jurisdiction to grant provisional measures is unaffected by any arbitration clause. The President of the court decides that the condition of urgency is fulfilled and therefore issues the requested provisional measures. Short summary There is other Belgian case law which does not accept that the appointment of an expert qualifies as "provisional measures" within the meaning of Art. 31 Brussels I. (See Liège, 9 September 2010)