general rule, the weaker parties (the consumer, the insured) can only be sued in theContracting State where they are domiciled. The stronger parties (the dealer, theinsurer), on the other hand, can also be sued, sometimes subject to certainconditions, in the Contracting State where the weaker party is domiciled.The rules on special jurisdiction listed above constitute an additional option for the plaintiff who can also choose to sue the defendant in the courts of the Contracting State inwhich that person is domiciled. There are, however, also some cases of so-called
that do not supplement but replace the jurisdiction based on thedefendant's domicile. For example,in matters relating to the ownership or tenancy of
only thecourts of the Contracting State where the property is situated have jurisdiction.in matters relating to rights that have to be registered such as
the courts of the Contracting State in which the registration has taken place are exclusively competent.subject to some conditions the parties also have the possibility of freely choosingthe Contracting State whose courts are to have jurisdiction. Such a
choice of courtagreement
usually leads to the exclusive competence of the courts of the chosenContracting State unless the parties stipulate otherwise.Subject to certain exceptions, the mere fact that the defendant enters an
leads to the jurisdiction of the courts of that Contracting State even if they are notordinarily competent.
Please note that the above description of the rules on jurisdiction in the Convention isneither exhaustive nor sufficiently thorough to allow a reliable assessment of the issue of jurisdiction in a specific case.
What happens if proceedings concerning the same dispute are brought in twoContracting States?
It may happen that both parties to a dispute initiate court proceedings on the same matter in different Contracting States. For example, after a traffic accident between two personsliving in Iceland and Finland, respectively, it could be that they both sue one another for damages in the Contracting State of the other party's domicile. In that situation theRegulation basically establishes a “first come first served” rule. The second court usedhas to stay its proceedings and wait for the other court to decide on its jurisdiction. If thefirst court considers itself competent the other court has to dismiss the case. Only if thefirst court comes to the conclusion that it does not have jurisdiction can the other courtcontinue its proceedings.
How is international jurisdiction determined if a Member State of the EuropeanUnion and a non-Member State that is not a signatory of the Lugano Conventionare involved?