Open AccessJurisdiction and Costs in Recent Inter-EU Cases of Démenti and Apology for Falsifying History
Author(s) -
Piotr Mostowik,
Edyta Figura-Góralczyk
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
law, identity and values
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2786-3840
pISSN - 2786-2542
DOI - 10.55073/2022.1.107-124
Subject(s) - jurisdiction , german , law , political science , perspective (graphical) , jurisprudence , personal jurisdiction , enforcement , supreme court , sociology , law and economics , computer science , history , archaeology , artificial intelligence
This study covers two issues concerning the intra-EU proceedings in the cases of personality rights infringement. The core of the analyzed matters are the special (alternative) jurisdiction and the costs of the proceedings. These problems are interesting both from the theoretical and the practical standpoints. The discussed judgments concern the dissemination of statements that constitute a historical falsification that is usually caused by using the expression Polish concentration camps instead of Nazi-German concentration camps. The CJEU recently address the issue of the special (alternative) jurisdiction based on Art. 7 (2) Brussels I Recast Regulation in such cases in the judgment from June 17, 2021, for the case C-800/19. This study analyses this judgment and the exclusion of jurisdiction based on ‘center of life interests’ in such cases for the ‘indivisible’ claims (e.g. the claim for apology). The problem of the costs is discussed from the perspective of the enforcement proceedings of foreign judgments in the intra-EU cases based on the German Supreme Court’s judgment from July 19, 2018 (IX ZB 10/18). The high costs of such proceedings based on the German Code of Civil Procedure were analyzed from the perspective of the access to court rule based on Article 6 (1) ECHR and the jurisprudence of ECtHR.