Cross-border Debt Recovery Blog
by Marco Sposini
Laywer, Milan Bar Association
Worldwide debt recovery news
The ECJ on Article 66(1) of Regulation Brussels I bis and Articles 5(3) and 6(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 22(1) of Regulation Brussels I
10 July 2025
The Court of Justice of the European Union, by judgment ECLI:EU:C:2025:563, dated 10 July 2025, in Case C‑99/24 – in proceedings between G.M.K-Z.B.M, a Polish municipal authority, and S.O., a natural person domiciled in the Netherlands, concerning the payment of compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property situated in Poland – ruled that:
1- Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that for the purpose of establishing the applicability ratione temporis of that regulation, legal proceedings are considered to be instituted, within the meaning of that provision, on the date on which the applicant brought his or her action, in a case in which there was subsequently a judgment, and not on the date on which the defendant, at a later stage, lodged a statement of opposition against that judgment seeking a review of the case.
2- Article 5(3), Article 6(1) and the first subparagraph of Article 22(1) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that:
– legal proceedings for payment of compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property after the termination of the tenancy agreement relating to that immovable property, which is situated in a Member State other than the one in which the defendant concerned is domiciled, do not constitute an action ‘in proceedings which have as their object rights in rem in immovable property’ and do not come within the concept of ‘tenancies of immovable property’, within the meaning of the first subparagraph of Article 22(1);
– a claim for compensation for the non-contractual use of immovable property must be considered as coming within ‘matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict’, within the meaning of Article 5(3); and
– Article 6(1) is applicable only where, on the date an action is brought by which an applicant sued several defendants before the court of a Member State, there is the same situation of fact and law so that it is expedient to hear and determine all the claims brought against those defendants at the same time to avoid the risk of irreconcilable judgments resulting from separate proceedings were those claims to be determined separately in different Member States.
The text is available here