REVIEW CASES

1. Two Swiss citizens married in Geneva in 2010. They have been living in Almeria since
2021. The husband wishes to file for divorce. Please indicate:
 Is Regulation 1215/2012 applicable? Material scope of application is not fulfilled Art.
1.2 a) RBI
 Do the Spanish courts have jurisdiction to decide on this divorce? Yes, because of art.
22 quater c) (In matters of personal and patrimonial relations between spouses,
marriage annulment, separation and divorce and their modifications, provided that no
other foreign Court has jurisdiction, when both spouses have habitual residence in
Spain at the time of the filing of the lawsuit or when they have had their last habitual
residence in Spain and one of them resides there, or when Spain is the habitual
residence of the defendant, or, in case of an action by mutual agreement, when one of
the spouses resides in Spain, or when the plaintiff has been habitually resident in Spain
for at least one year since the filing of the lawsuit, or when the plaintiff is Spanish and
has been habitually resident in Spain for at least six months prior to the filing of the
lawsuit, as well as when both spouses have Spanish nationality).

2. A dispute of incapacitation of an English citizen with habitual residence in Marbella

before the Spanish courts. The said citizen has all his assets in England. The defendant
requests the Spanish court to declare itself incompetent in favor of the English judges,
as he considers that the case is more connected with England than with Spain. Indicate:
 Is Regulation 1215/2012 applicable? Material scope of application is not fulfilled Art.
1.2 a) RBI
 Do the Spanish courts have jurisdiction to decide on this issue? Yes, because of art. 22
quater b) (In matters relating to the capacity of persons and measures for the protection
of persons of legal age or their property, when they have their habitual residence in
Spain.). The connection between the assets and UK is as important as the personal
connection of the citizen (with habitual residence in Spain) and our territory-
 Will the Spanish judges decline jurisdiction in favor of the English judge? The
Spanish Courts can not decline their jurisdiction, because they have jurisdiction and
the personal protection of the citizen, who lives in Spain, is an strong connection

3. A Saharawi stateless, arrives by boat in Motril (Granada). He begins to work, without a

work permit picking tomatoes. After ten months in Spain, a Moroccan woman files a
lawsuit against him on behalf of her son, requesting the paternity of the child with
respect to the stateless person. Indicate:
 Is LOPJ aplicable? Yes, because there is no international treaties applicable
(art. 21 LOPJ)
 Does the defendant have his domicile in Spain? Yes, because of art. 22.ter.2
(“For the purposes of this Article, a natural person shall be deemed to be
domiciled in Spain when he has his habitual residence in Spain”).
 Do the Spanish Courts have jurisdiction? Yes, because of art. 22 quater d) (“In
matters of filiation and parent-child relations, protection of minors and
parental responsibility, when the child or minor has his or her habitual
residence in Spain at the time the lawsuit is filed or the plaintiff is Spanish or
 habitually resides in Spain or, in any case, at least six months before the
filing of the lawsuit).

4. The company TURK, with its registered office in Turkey, has filed a lawsuit in a
Spanish court against YORK, a company with its registered office in New York, for
breach of a contract signed in Madrid (the obligations of which were to be fully
performed in Spain).
The contract contained a clause expressly submitting any disputes arising from the
contract to the courts of Ankara.

 Is Regulation 1215/2012 applicable? No. Personal scope is not fulfilled: no

exclusive jurisdiction rule in favor of MS (art. 24), no agreement on jurisdiction in
favor of MS (art. 25, 26), no defendant´s domiciled in a MS (art. 4).
 Do the Spanish courts have jurisdiction to hear the dispute: Yes, because of art. 22
quinquies a) (“In matters of contractual obligations, when the obligation that is the
object of the claim has been performed or must be performed in Spain”).
 What attitude should the Spanish court observe if the plaintiff. They can not decline
its jurisdiction in favor of the Turkish courts. The agreement on jurisdiction in favor
of a third State is not binding. It could only be taken into account if the jurisdiction
of the Spanish courts is based on the defendant´s domicile (Art. 22 ter 4 “However,
the jurisdiction established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Article may be
excluded by a choice of court agreement in favor of a foreign court. In such a case,
the Courts shall stay the proceedings and may hear the claim only if the designated
foreign Courts have declined jurisdiction”),.
 What would be the answer if the defendant company had its statutory seat in Paris
and the submission had been made in favor of the courts of Ankara? The same but
based in RBI because the defendant would be domiciled in a MS and therefore art.
7.1 would be applicable).

5. An English citizen with domicile in Dublin is sued before a court of said city by a
Spanish citizen with habitual residence in Dublin. The plaintiff is claiming 50,000 euros
for damages arising from a traffic accident in Rio de Janeiro caused by the defendant.
 Is the Brussels I-bis Regulation applicable to this case? Yes. Material (art. 1),
territorial (art. 81), temporal (art. 66) and personal (art. 4) scopes of application
fulfilled.
 Can the Irish court declare itself incompetent to hear the case and refer it to the
Brazilian or Spanish courts? No, because they have jurisdiction according to the
defendant´s domicile.
 Are the Spanish courts competent to hear this case? No. No special jurisdiction rule
of RBI is base don nationality.