Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

JURISDICTION: Banking on it

01 December 2017  

In the first of a two-part consideration, Asaf Niemoj assesses conflicting case law on the location of bank accounts to establish jurisdiction under the Brussels Regulation Recast

On 16 June 2016 the European Court of Justice (ECJ) delivered its judgment in the matter of Universal Music International Holding BV v Tétreault Schilling. This judgment seems to stand in contradiction to an earlier judgment delivered by the same court only about a year and a half earlier – Kolassa v Barclays Bank plc [2015]. If, following Universal, the ECJ’s rulings lead indeed to an inconsistent interpretation and, consequently, lack of clarity in this area of the law, then this might affect the application of one of the most common instruments used to establish jurisdiction in the EU – hence the importance of the issue. This is true particularly in light of the fact that, to date, the ECJ has provided no further clarifications which might help shed some light on what might be seen as two contradicting judgments.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    Handelskwekerij G J Bier BV v Mines de Potasse d’Alsace SA [1976] EUECJ C-21/76

    Kolassa v Barclays Bank plc [2015] EUECJ C-375/13

    Kronhofer v Maier & ors [2004] EUECJ C-168/02

    Universal Music International Holding BV v Tétreault Schilling & ors [2016] EUECJ C-12/15