Brussels Regulation meaning

This Checklist offers guidance on how to determine whether an Irish court has jurisdiction to deal with the specific civil dispute. This Checklist explains how to assess jurisdiction for a particular civil dispute in Ireland. In doing so, it reviews the regimes under Brussels I (recast), the Lugano Convention and the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. It sets out a high-level overview to help decide whether proceedings ought properly to be brought in Ireland. For guidance on: the particular court in which to issue proceedings, see Practice Note: Ireland-Starting a civil action pre-action considerations before pursuing a civil claim in an Irish court, and the steps to commence and advance a claim in Ireland, see Practice Notes: Ireland-Starting a civil action and Ireland-Pre-action conduct; and for initiating and case managing a civil claim, see Ireland-Progressing and managing a High Court civil claim further elements of Irish civil litigation, see: Ireland-Alternative dispute resolution and settlement-overview, which links to detailed guidance on specific...

ARCHIVED This Checklist is archived and is not maintained or updated. It considers how UK courts would apply Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast)—which concerns the allocation of court jurisdiction for civil and commercial matters—if the UK were to leave the EU on exit day without a deal, the so‑called ‘no deal Brexit’ scenario. ‘Exit day’ has the meaning given by section 20 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. The Checklist reviews the Regulation’s jurisdictional articles and evaluates whether the UK courts will apply them and, if so, in what way. The outcome varies depending on whether proceedings are started before exit day (with the jurisdictional issue decided afterwards) or initiated after exit day. The principal UK instrument is the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, SI 2019/479. Coming into force on exit day, it includes a range of savings provisions and modifications to Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), alongside amendment and revocation of specified UK and EU legislation. For details of the legislation...

Use this checklist to identify which EU Member State’s courts are competent to hear a dispute. It does so by referencing the provisions of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), applied to allocate jurisdiction. The starting point is that proceedings should be brought against a defendant in the courts of the Member State where they are domiciled. That position is displaced by various specific rules. Some of those exceptions bite automatically, while others operate only where the claimant elects to invoke them. The articles are applied in the hierarchy shown in the table below: if the first provision is not engaged, consider the next, and proceed accordingly... Determining jurisdiction Type of jurisdiction Consideration Mandatory/by choice Brussels I (recast) Exclusive jurisdiction: in certain prescribed situations, the courts of an EU Member State have jurisdiction irrespective of any contrary party agreement or of the parties’ domicile...

In this issue: UK mergers UK private actions UK market investigations EU antitrust EU State aid Daily and weekly news alerts LexTalk®Competition: a Lexis®Nexis community New and updated content Caselex UK mergers The CMA has issued its final positions following reviews of three sets of merger remedies and a single market investigation order: discharge undertakings in lieu of reference from August 2011 linked to Acergy SA’s acquisition of Subsea 7 Inc discharge undertakings in lieu of reference from August 2008 relating to Home Retail Group plc’s purchase of 27 leasehold properties from Focus (DIY) Ltd discharge undertakings dating from February 2002 by Lloyds TSB Group plc concerning its acquisition of Abbey National plc revoke the Energy Market Investigation (ECOES/DES) Order 2016 The CMA determined that, due to changes in circumstances, all of the relevant remedies are no longer suitable and should therefore be released (for the undertakings)...

In this issue: UK NSI 2021 EU antitrust EU competition policy EU State aid LexTalk®Competition: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Caselex UK NSI 2021 High Court refuses application for interim relief by FTDI Holding regarding national security order to sell its shares in Future Technology Devices International Limited The High Court has handed down its judgment in FTDI Holding Ltd v Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, arising from FTDI Holding Ltd’s attempt to obtain interim relief against the defendant’s direction requiring it to divest its 80.2% interest in Future Technology Devices International Limited (FTDI). The proceedings addressed FTDI Holding’s request to pause enforcement of that order. The court declined to grant the interim relief sought. Background On 5 November 2024, following a national security assessment, the Government made a final order under section 26 of the National Security and Investment Act 2021 (NSIA 2021). The...

The Brussels gathering of Eurogroup finance ministers was a notable moment. It was the first appearance by a UK Chancellor at the table since the country’s 2020 departure from the EU. Rachel Reeves took part to signal her administration’s intent to reset ties with the EU, particularly on economic and financial matters. Her presence was intended to demonstrate the new administration’s readiness to turn the page. She told journalists that today begins the groundwork to restore trust and repair relations after a bruising and combative few years between the UK and the European Union. Speaking after the session, she said this was a clear sign of the new UK government’s resolve to recalibrate the UK’s relationship with the European Union and of the importance she places on realising the economic potential of a shared future. Reeves stressed the need to cooperate, noting that financial markets are deeply interconnected and that safeguarding stability is a precondition for economic growth. EU policymakers welcomed both her attendance and her remarks, and appeared positive...

Allocation of jurisdiction within the UK under the CJJA 1982 This Practice Note explores how jurisdiction is apportioned across the UK under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (CJJA 1982). It examines the scope of that regime and the conditions that must be satisfied for it to apply, and considers its interaction with Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) (the Regulation). It sets out the primary rule together with the departures from it, and, lastly, addresses forum non conveniens in this setting. The CJJA’s intra-UK jurisdiction framework is designed to furnish rules allocating jurisdiction inside the UK itself. Distinct rules and factors arise when assessing whether UK courts possess jurisdiction over a claim that contains an international dimension. The UK comprises four countries, yet there are only three legal jurisdictions, and CJJA 1982, s 50, describes each as ‘parts of the UK’. England and Wales Scotland Northern Ireland Practitioners in England engaged in cross-border disputes must be cognisant of a range...

This Practice Note examines the provisions of the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982 (CJJA 1982) that resolve questions of international jurisdiction for employment proceedings commenced on or after 1 January 2021. For a visual summary, see: Determining jurisdiction in employment disputes (1 January 2021 onwards)—flowchart. For guidance where proceedings began on or before 31 December 2020, see: Practice Note: International jurisdiction—allocating employment cases between national courts and tribunals pre-1 January 2021 [Archived] Determining jurisdiction in employment disputes (to IP completion day)—flowchart [Archived] Background Where a common law claim is brought in the courts—such as a damages claim for breach of contract or to enforce post-termination restrictions (restrictive covenants)—jurisdiction is governed by the CJJA 1982 and the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). These rules apply to proceedings instituted on or after 1 January 2021 and replace Retained Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) (commonly known as the Brussels 1a Regulation), and the Lugano Convention, which applied to proceedings started before the end of...

ARCHIVED : This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, the recast Brussels I, brought significant alterations to how judgments from other EU Member States are enforced in England under the new framework. These reforms shift the onus for having a judgment from one EU Member State, the State of Origin, acknowledged or enforced in another, the State of Enforcement, away from the party seeking recognition or enforcement there. Instead, the responsibility now lies with the party opposing recognition or enforcement to demonstrate one of the narrow refusal grounds. At the heart of these updates is removing the need to obtain a declaration of enforceability. Under Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I, a party seeking to enforce a judgment from elsewhere in the EU had to obtain a declaration in the State of Enforcement that judgment was enforceable. That requirement for a declaration confirming a judgment’s enforceability has, however, now been abolished by Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast)...

ARCHIVED : This Precedent is archived and no longer maintained. It is intended for use in lodging a judgment in accordance with the enforcement measures prescribed by Regulation (EC) 44/2001, Brussels I (Chapter III, section 2)...

Claim No. [ enter claim number ]. [ BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE [ BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS [ OF ENGLAND AND WALES OR AT [ enter location ] ] ] [ State division ] [ Name specialist court ] [ Enter location ] DISTRICT REGISTRY OR THE COUNTY COURT AT [ enter location ] [ BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS LIST ] ] In relation to Council Regulation (EC) No...

ARCHIVED This Precedent is archived and no longer maintained. It, together with its drafting notes, may still be used for proceedings begun in the courts of England and Wales at any time, provided the related case in an EU Member State court was issued on or before 31 December 2020 and the transitional jurisdiction provisions in Articles 67 or 69 of the Withdrawal Agreement are satisfied. For guidance on whether Brussels I (recast) applies, see Practice Note: Brussels I (recast)—application to the UK post IP completion day (jurisdiction) [Archived]. Related precedents For a supporting witness statement, see Precedent: Witness statement in support of application for stay under art 30 of recast Brussels Regulation. For draft orders, see: Court order for an application to stay proceedings under art 30(1) of Brussels I (recast) or Court order for an application to stay proceedings under art 30(2) of Brussels I (recast). General points The application should be brought within the period allowed by...

In England and Wales, the courts possess jurisdiction over divorce and judicial separation proceedings pursuant to Council Regulation EC 2201/2003 (often referred to as Brussels II bis)...

Form D180 (PDF Format) can be utilised in relation to the registration of orders under Article 39 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning decisions in matrimonial matters (Brussels II bis)...