Second appeal. Validity of the determination of jurisdiction to settle the dispute by a jurisdiction clause in the general conditions of sale, referred to in a document issued by one of the contracting parties, under European Union law

JURISPRUDENŢĂ COMENTATĂ ŞI ADNOTATĂ

Abstract

According to Article 1.065 of the Civil Procedure Code, the provisions of Book VII on international civil proceedings apply to private law proceedings with foreign elements insofar as international treaties to which Romania is a party, European Union law or special laws do not provide otherwise.

According to art 25 para. (1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, the parties may conclude, in writing or orally and with written confirmation, an agreement conferring jurisdiction on the court of a Member State.

However, where the two parties have not signed a contract, a jurisdiction clause in a DRAFT WAYBILL NON NEGOTIABLE, which is not signed by the addressee, has not actually been the subject of consent between the parties which is clearly and precisely expressed. As a result, the provision relating to the jurisdiction agreement in such a non-negotiable DRAFT WAYBILL is ineffective, contrary to the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-64/17 Saey Home & Garden NV/SA. Where there is more than one defendant, under Article 8(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, the plaintiff may bring proceedings against any of them before the court for the place where any of them is domiciled if there is a close connection between the claims against them and it is appropriate to examine and try them together in order to avoid the risk of irreconcilable judgments being given if the cases are tried separately.