Gantner Electronic GmbH v Basch Exploitatie Maatschappij BV: ECJ 8 May 2003

The dutch based claimant sought damages for wrongful termination of what it said was a long-term contract. The claimant in Austria claimed the price of goods sold and delivered pursuant to a number of one-off contracts to which the defendant (claimant in Holland) responded by setting off a counterclaim for breach of the long-term contract.
Held: The causes of actions were not the same. The fact that the defence and counterclaim in Austria relied on the long-term contract sued upon in Holland was irrelevant since that reliance only appeared in Austria as a defence. Where proceedings between the same parties relating to the same cause of action had been begun in separate jurisdictions, the court second to be apprised should stay those proceedings. When looking at whether they were the same cause, only the claimants claims should be inspected, not any issues rasied by the defendants.
ECJ REFERENCE to the Court under the Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court


Wathelet (Rapporteur), P


C-111/01, Times 14-May-2003, [2003] EUECJ C-111/01, [2003] ECR 1-4207




Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 21



Cited by:

CitedKolden Holdings Ltd v Rodette Commerce Ltd and Another CA 21-Jan-2008
Lawrence Collins LJ said: ‘For the purposes of article 27, the question whether the ‘same cause of action’ is raised before the courts of two member states is answered by looking at the claims made, and not at the defences raised at a later stage to . .
CitedStarlight Shipping Co v Allianz Marine and Aviation Versicherungs Ag and Others CA 20-Dec-2012
The Alexander T, owned by the appellant and insured by the respondents was a total loss. The insurers resisted payment, the appellant came to allege improperly, and the parties had settled the claim on full payment under a Tomlin Order. The owners . .
CitedWright v Granath QBD 16-Jan-2020
Defamation across borders – Jurisdiction
The claimant began an action for defamation in an online publication. The Norwegian resident defendant had begun an action there seeking a declaration negating liability. The Court was now asked by the defendant whether under Lugano, the UK action . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Jurisdiction

Updated: 14 October 2022; Ref: scu.182128