In answer to a question referred for a preliminary ruling, in the context of the application of Regulation no. 1215/2012 (the Brussels Regulation), CJEU has held that a jurisdiction agreement between the contractual parties based in the same Member State may involve the jurisdiction of the courts in another Member State to settle disputes relating to that contract, even if neither the parties nor the performance of the agreement are connected with that other Member State.
This interpretation is crucial to an efficient and predictable management of cross-border litigation and is aimed at ensuring legal certainty and avoiding conflicts of jurisdiction while maintaining confidence in the administration of justice within the European Union.
The Court was asked to clarify the application of the European provisions in the context in which the extraneity element, as a mandatory element for the applicability of the Brussels Regulation, was limited to the existence of an agreement conferring jurisdiction on the courts of a Member State other than that in which the contracting parties were established.
The European Court has held that, as regards the choice of jurisdiction, a legal situation has an extraneity element simply by virtue of the existence of an agreement conferring jurisdiction on the courts of a Member State other than that in which the contracting parties are established.
