This article analyses a recent Supreme Court decision(1) and seeks to answer the following questions:
Can a defendant which is domiciled abroad be sued in Hungary under the EU Brussels Recast Regulation (1215/2012/EU) in the event of defective performance of an international sales contract if the place of performance is abroad?
Can the jurisdiction of a Hungarian court be established based on the fact that a lower court expressly established its jurisdiction at the beginning of the litigation?
How is the Ex Works (EXW) clause to be interpreted within the meaning of the EU Brussels I Regulation?
Facts
A contract of sale was concluded between the applicant, as the buyer, and the defendant, as the seller, for the purchase of potatoes. The applicant, established in Hungary, delivered the goods to Hungary from the defendant's premises in Slovakia by contracting a carrier and then returned the goods with reference to a quality defect.