PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

X. - Rb. Hasselt, 1 February 2011

Details of the court

Belgium, First Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

31 January 2011

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The applicant seeks enforcement of a decision which was issued in proceedings between the applicant, as defendant, and Mrs. C., as claimant. This decision dissolves their marriage through divorce, grants parental authority to both parents and settles the maintenance costs. The applicant incorrectly bases its application for enforcement solely on the Brussels IIa Regulation. While matters relating to divorce and parental authority do fall within the scope of Brussels IIa, maintenance obligations are governed by the Brussels I Regulation. The Court has jurisdiction over the application for a declaration of enforceability pursuant to Art. 29 Brussels IIa and Art. 39 Brussels I. The procedure has been conducted correctly by the applicant, in accordance with Art. 23 of the Belgian Code on Private International Law, which is referred to by Art. 30(1) Brussels IIa and Art. 40(1) Brussels I. The documents produced by the applicant comply with Art. 37 Brussels IIa. The defendant does not produce the certificate referred to in Art. 54 Brussels I Regulation, but the Court considers that it has sufficient information before it to dispense with its production (cf. Art. 55 Brussels I Regulation). There is no ground for refusal as listed in Arts. 22 and 23 Brussels IIa. The application is admissible and well founded and therefore granted.