Gantner Electronic (Judgments Convention/Enforcement of judgments) [2003] EUECJ C-111/01 (08 May 2003)

Gantner Electronic (Judgments Convention/Enforcement of judgments) [2003] EUECJ C-111/01 (08 May 2003)

Article 21 of the Brussels Convention must be construed as meaning that, in order to determine whether two claims brought between the same parties before the courts of different Contracting States have the same subject-matter, account should be taken only of the claims of the respective applicants, to the exclusion of the defence submissions raised by a defendant.

Citation
[2003] EUECJ C-111/01
Parties
Applicant: Gantner Electronic GmbH; Respondent: Basch Exploitatie Maatschappij BV
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
08 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling / Reference From Oberster Gerichtshof (austrian Supreme Court) to the Court of Justice of the European Communities
Outcome
Preliminary ruling issued; first and second questions answered; third question declared inadmissible.
Legal Topics
Lis Pendens, Jurisdiction, Set Off, Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments
Private International Law Civil Procedure Lis Pendens Jurisdiction Set Off Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gantner Electronic GmbH

Applicant

Basch Exploitatie Maatschappij BV

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling / Reference From Oberster Gerichtshof (austrian Supreme Court) to the Court of Justice of the European Communities

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 21 of the Brussels Convention requires consideration of only the claims of the applicants or also the defences of the defendants in determining lis pendens between courts of different Contracting States
  2. 2 Whether a decision on the legal nature of a contract in one Contracting State is binding in subsequent proceedings in another Contracting State

Ratio Decidendi

Article 21 of the Brussels Convention must be construed as meaning that, in order to determine whether two claims brought between the same parties before the courts of different Contracting States have the same subject-matter, account should be taken only of the claims of the respective applicants, to the exclusion of the defence submissions raised by a defendant.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling issued; first and second questions answered; third question declared inadmissible.

Orders

  • Article 21 of the Brussels Convention must be construed as meaning that, in order to determine whether two claims brought between the same parties before the courts of different Contracting States have the same subject-matter, account should be taken only of the claims of the respective applicants, to the exclusion...
  • The third question referred is inadmissible.