2024

DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.31178/AUBD/2024.17  

Abstract:In disputes between a professional, as plaintiff, and a consumer, as defendant, the rules of international and territorial jurisdiction generally confer jurisdiction on the courts of the defendant’s domicile. These rules are of public policy, establishing exclusive jurisdiction, and are intended to protect the weaker party in the legal relationship. In this study, we will analyze several scenarios in which, although the rules of jurisdiction establish the jurisdiction of the court at the defendant’s—the consumer’s—place of residence, the defendant is, in fact, located at a different address or is unknown. Thus, the issue of determining the court with territorial jurisdiction to hear the case arises both in purely domestic disputes, where the court must determine whether it can hear the dispute or whether it must decline jurisdiction and refer the case to another court in the country, and in disputes with a foreign element, with the Romanian court legitimately asking itself whether it has international jurisdiction and, following that, what the territorial jurisdiction is in such a scenario and according to which rules it is determined.

Keywords:exclusive territorial jurisdiction, unknown domicile of the defendant, actual residence of the defendant, Regulation No. 1215/2012, protection of the weaker party, right to a fair trial