Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Harald Kolassa v Barclays Bank plc (C-375/13)
Judgment
The questions referred
Question 3
50

Harald Kolassa v Barclays Bank plc (C-375/13)

Judgment of 28 Jan 2015law://eu/cjeu/2013/c-375-13/para_50@2026-11-10

50By contrast, such an attribution of jurisdiction is justified if the applicant’s domicile is in fact the place in which the events giving rise to the loss took place or the loss occurred.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fourth Chamber
Case: C-375/13 · ECLI:EU:C:2015:37
Decided: 28 Jan 2015
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Handelsgericht Wien (Austria)
Applicant: Harald Kolassa
Defendant: Barclays Bank plc
Rapporteur: M. Safjan
Advocate General: M. Szpunar
Bench: 5 judges
L. Bay Larsen, K. Jürimäe, J. Malenovský, M. Safjan, A. Prechal
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62013CJ0375

Topics

Judicial cooperation in civil matters

History · 1 version

28 Jan 2015Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters
Cited by 16: Brian Andrew Kerr v Pavlo Postnov and Natalia Postnova (C-25/18); Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V (C-451/18); Inkreal s.r.o. v Dúha reality s.r.o (C-566/22); Verein für Konsumenteninformation v Volkswagen AG (C-343/19)2 provisions; Helga Löber v Barclays Bank PLC (C-304/17); JX v FTI Touristik GmbH (C-774/22); Libuše Králová v Primera Air Scandinavia (C-215/18); Vereniging van Effectenbezitters v BP plc (C-709/19)5 provisions; Jana Petruchová v FIBO Group Holdings Limited (C-208/18)2 provisions; Athenian Brewery SA and Heineken NV v Macedonian Thrace Brewery SA (C-393/23)3 provisions; NM v Club La Costa (UK) plc and Others (C-821/21); HRVATSKE ŠUME d.o.o., Zagreb v BP Europa SE (C-242/20)2 provisions; MOL Magyar Olaj- és Gázipari Nyrt. v Mercedes-Benz Group AG (C-425/22); Electricity & Water Authority of the Government of Bahrain and Others v Prysmian Netherlands BV and Others (C-672/23); JA v Wurth Automotive GmbH (C-177/22); V A and Z A v TP (C-645/20)
Cites 12: Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters; Francesco Benincasa v Dentalkit Srl (C-269/95); Jakob Handte & Co. GmbH v Traitements Mécano-chimiques des Surfaces SA (C-26/91); Česká spořitelna, a.s. v Gerald Feichter (C-419/11); Marc Brogsitter v Fabrication de Montres Normandes EURL and Karsten Fräßdorf (C-548/12); Rudolf Kronhofer v Marianne Maier and Others (C-168/02); Armin Maletic and Marianne Maletic v lastminute.com Gmbh and TUI Österreich GmbH (C-478/12); Danmarks Rederiforening, acting on behalf of DFDS Torline A/S v LO Landsorganisationen i Sverige, acting on behalf of SEKO Sjöfolk Facket för Service och Kommunikation (C-18/02); Effer SpA v Hans-Joachim Kantner (C-38/81); Coty Germany GmbH v First Note Perfumes NV (C-360/12); Hi Hotel HCF SARL v Uwe Spoering (C-387/12); Media-Saturn-Holding GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (C-92/10)