PIL instrument(s)

Case number and/or case name

OLG Frankfurt, 1.8.2013 – 11 AR 234/12

Details of the court

Germany, Second Instance

Articles referred to by the court

Date of the judgement

31 July 2013

Appeal history

CJEU's case law cited by the court

Summary

The parties argued on damage claims. There were six defendants domiciled in different Member States. It was doubtful whether they could be sued together pursuant to Art. 6 no. 1 Brussels I. The court denied the international jurisdiction regarding defendant no. 5. It held: the fact that there is a preliminary question on judicial issues (asking whether a certain business model violates German tax law) that potentially concerns all defendants isn’t sufficient to assume a close connection as required by Art. 6 no. 1 Brussels I. The judgment is correct. In the present case the connection between the different claims was loose: the facts brought up by the plaintiff didn’t indicate any concurrency in actual or judicial questions that would have made it necessary to sue all defendants before the same court. In fact, it hasn’t even been stated that the preliminary question was relevant to the defendant’s liability.