Brussels 2012 Regulation Quiz

A legal framework within the EU that governs the recognition and enforcement of judgments made in one EU country in other EU countries.

Changes made to the existing EU Judgments Regulation, aiming to streamline and simplify the process of enforcing judgments.

A legal agreement between parties that specifies which court will have jurisdiction to hear a dispute.

The ability of a court to hear and decide a case.

The Recast Regulation allows an EU court to hear a case against a non-EU defendant if the defendant is an employer whose employee habitually works in an EU country.

The Recast Regulation allows an EU court to hear a case against a non-EU defendant if the defendant is a trader directing commercial activities towards an EU country.

Under the Recast Regulation, a non-EU defendant can be sued in an EU court with exclusive jurisdiction granted by a jurisdiction agreement, even if neither party to the agreement is domiciled in the EU.

The Recast Regulation clarifies that the law of the EU court with exclusive jurisdiction will be applied to determine the validity of a jurisdiction agreement, if the validity is disputed.

A court order that prohibits a party from starting or continuing a lawsuit in another country's court.

Legal principle that suggests each EU court should be free to determine its jurisdiction, without interference from other EU courts.

A legal agreement between EU member states that determines which courts have jurisdiction to hear legal disputes.

This procedure allows a EU court to postpone a case if there's a similar ongoing lawsuit in a non-EU country.

A court or jurisdiction that has the sole authority to hear and decide a particular type of case.

The court where the property is located has exclusive jurisdiction in disputes related to immovable property rights or tenancies.

The court where a patent, trademark, design, or similar right was applied for, registered, or deemed to have taken place, has the exclusive jurisdiction for disputes involving its validity or registration.

The court where a judgment is being or has been enforced has exclusive jurisdiction over enforcement disputes.

A court can have jurisdiction if the defendant voluntarily appears before it, unless the appearance was solely to challenge the court's jurisdiction or another court has exclusive jurisdiction under Article 24.

A contractually agreed-upon court can have exclusive jurisdiction over a dispute.

The domicile of the defendant, meaning their permanent place of residence, typically determines the court's general jurisdiction.

Specific types of jurisdiction, such as that based on the subject matter of the case or the location of the event, are considered exceptions to the general rule of general jurisdiction.

The Hague Choice of Court Convention applies to international cases where the chosen court is located in a contracting state. The agreement between S and M falls under the convention because both Dublin (the chosen court) and Spain (where the proceeding is brought) are contracting states.

The Brussels I Recast Regulation applies to cases within the EU where parties choose a court located in the EU. The agreement between S and M falls under this regulation because Dublin, the chosen court, is located within the EU.

The Brussels I Recast Regulation overrides the Hague Convention when all parties are located in the EU, regardless of where the chosen court is located.

Because the chosen court (Dublin) is located within the EU, the court will apply the Brussels I Recast Regulation.

The chosen court is bound by the choice of court agreement and will stay the proceeding until the judgement from the chosen court is rendered.

Judgments rendered in one EU Member State are directly applicable to other EU Member States. This creates a united EU judicial system.

The Brussels I Recast Regulation, the Lugano Convention, and the Hague Choice of Court Convention make up the EU's international court system.

The CJEU serves as the final authority for interpretation of EU law, including court agreements.

A legal principle that prevents different courts in different jurisdictions from hearing the same case simultaneously, leading to conflicting rulings.

The specific outcome or relief that a claimant seeks from the court.

Two legal actions are considered related if they are connected so closely that it's practical to hear and decide them together to avoid conflicting rulings.

The court that receives a case first is considered the "first seized" court.

The Brussels Convention (now Brussels I) was adopted in 1968, its successor is known as Brussels I recast. It established legal framework to regulate jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in cross-border matters within the European Union.

The Lugano Convention is an international agreement which facilitates cross-border litigation in civil and commercial matters between the member states.

An action in court aimed at upholding or enforcing a contract.

An action in court aimed at canceling or nullifying an existing contract due to some legal grounds.

Refusing to recognize a judgement issued in another country because of specific legal reasons, such as violation of fundamental principles or lack of proper jurisdiction.

Refusing to enforce a judgement issued in another country due to legal grounds similar to those used for refusal of recognition. This happens when an individual requests the enforcement court to block the enforcement.

A specific legal procedure in civil law countries where a court in the country where the judgement is sought to be enforced (State addressed) grants an order allowing the enforcement.

An order from a court in the State addressed that grants the enforcement of a foreign judgement, making it legally valid in that country.

A common law doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an issue already decided in a previous lawsuit, even if the lawsuit involved a different legal claim.

A judgment issued in one EU member state is automatically recognized and enforceable in all other member states without needing any special procedure.

A party can request a decision from a court to confirm that there are no legal grounds to refuse recognition of a foreign judgement, as per Article 45 of the EU regulation.

Before the Brussels Convention, foreign judgments needed a separate process to be declared valid in Italy. After joining the convention, automatic recognition of EU judgments became the general rule.