ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2024:8779

• Datum uitspraak: 17 juli 2024
• Publicatiedatum: 12 maart 2025
• Zaaknummer: C/13/753927
• Instantie: Rechtbank Amsterdam
• Type: Uitspraak
• Rechtsgebied: Civiel recht
• Procedures: NCC
• Rechters: L.S. Frakes
• Vindplaatsen: Rechtspraak.nl

AI samenvatting door Lexboost • Automatisch gegenereerd

Toewijzing van een verzoek tot conservatoir derdenbeslag tegen een debiteur in het kader van een biomethaanovereenkomst

In deze zaak heeft de aanvrager de rechtbank verzocht om verlof te verlenen voor een conservatoir derdenbeslag tegen de debiteur. De rechtbank oordeelt dat een beslagorder tegen een debiteur gevestigd in een andere EU-lidstaat kan worden gebaseerd op het Nederlandse nationale recht. Dit wordt niet voorafgegaan door de EAPO-verordening, aangezien artikel 1, lid 2 van deze verordening de mogelijkheid van behoudmaatregelen onder nationaal recht toestaat. De NCC-rechtbank in kort geding is bevoegd om het verzoek te behandelen, aangezien de aanvrager en de debiteur de NCC als de juiste kamer van de rechtbank Amsterdam hebben aangewezen voor de behandeling van geschillen die voortvloeien uit hun overeenkomsten.

De juridische vereisten voor een conservatoir derdenbeslag (artikel 718 van het Wetboek van Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering, Rv) zijn vervuld. De aanvrager heeft aangetoond dat zijn recht, zoals ingeroepen in de aanvraag, gegrond is, en de verzochte beslagen voldoen aan de vereisten van proportionaliteit en subsidiariteit. Daarom zal het verzoek worden toegewezen. Verlof voor beslag zal worden verleend onder de voorwaarde dat de uitspraak voorafgaand aan de tenuitvoerlegging aan de debiteur wordt betekend, aangezien dit een vereiste is voor deze beslissing om een "uitspraak" te zijn binnen de reikwijdte van artikel 2, sub a van de Brussel 1bis-verordening.

De rechtbank heeft de tijdslimiet voor het starten van de hoofdprocedure vastgesteld op 14 dagen na de eerste beslaglegging, en de aanvrager mag het beslag tot drie keer herhalen binnen een periode van 30 dagen na de eerste beslaglegging. De rechtbank zal ook het certificaat uitgeven zoals bedoeld in artikel 53 van de Brusselverordening (herzien).

Uitspraak

judgment

AMSTERDAM DISTRICT COURT

Netherlands Commercial Court

NCC District Court – Court in Summary Proceedings

Case number: C/13/753927

Judgment in ex parte application proceedings

17 July 2024

Applicant :

[APPLICANT] ,

[city] (Netherlands),

represented by C.G. Verburg, lawyer

Debtor:

[DEBTOR] ,

[city] (Germany).

1. Application

1.1.

Applicant requests the Court to:

• grant leave for a third-party attachment against the debtor,
• estimate the applicant’s claim against the debtor, including interest and costs, at
• determine the time limit to initiate main proceedings at 14 days from the date after the first attachment is made,
• grant leave to repeat the attachment up to three times within a 30 day timeframe after the first attachment,
• declare the decision enforceable notwithstanding any remedy
• issue the certificate as referred to in Article 53 of the Brussels Regulation (recast).

2. Discussion

2.1.

The first issue for the Court to decide on is whether a cross-border application for third-party attachment, targeting a debtor’s bank accounts held at a German bank (with a German IBAN and Swift identifier), can be awarded on the basis of Dutch national law. There may be some doubt on this issue, given Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a European Account Preservation Order procedure (the EAPO Regulation). The Court, however, concludes that an attachment order can be based on Dutch national law, as Article 1(2) of the EAPO Regulation provides that an Account Preservation Order shall be available to the creditor
as an alternative to preservation measures under national law, showing that such measures under national law are available notwithstanding the EAPO Regulation.

2.2.

Under Article 35 of the Brussels Regulation (recast) (1215/2012), an application may be made to the courts of a Member State for such provisional, including protective, measures as may be available under the law of that Member State. And in any event, the Court today has jurisdiction to deal with the merits of the case under Article 25 (1) of the Brussels Regulation, as the applicant and the debtor designated the Amsterdam District Court in a choice-of-court clause and agreed on the appropriate NCC chamber of the Amsterdam District Court to deal with all disputes, including interim and protective measures, arising from the biomethane purchase agreements concluded on 23 April 2024.

2.3.

All other NCC requirements (Article 1.3.2 NCC Rules of Procedure) have been met. Therefore, the NCC Court in Summary Proceedings is the appropriate chamber to deal with this application.

2.4.

Dutch law applies to the procedure and requirements for granting leave for a pre-judgment attachment by a Dutch court. Dutch law also governs the biomethane purchase agreements pursuant to the choice of law clauses in the respective agreements (Articles 14.6 and 16.1).

2.5.

The legal requirements for a pre-judgment third-party attachment (Article 718 Dutch Code of Civil Procedure, DCCP) have been fulfilled. The applicant has demonstrated, on a summary enquiry, that its right as invoked in the application has merit; and the requested attachments meet the requirements of proportionality and subsidiarity. Therefore, the application will be awarded.

2.6.

The time limit for initiating the main proceedings will be set at 14 days after the first attachment has been made, and the applicant will be allowed to repeat the attachment up to 3 times after the first attachment, as requested in the application.

2.7.

Under Article 2(a) of the Brussels Regulation (recast) a judgment for protective measures given without the debtor being summoned to appear (as is the case with Dutch attachment proceedings, including today’s judgment), is only considered to be meaning ready for enforcement under the Brussels Regulation) where the judgment is served on the defendant prior to enforcement. Leave for attachment will therefore be granted on the condition of service prior to enforcement.

2.8.

The Court will issue the certificate pursuant to Article 53 of the Brussels Regulation (recast), as requested in the application.

3. Order

THE COURT IN SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS

3.1.

Leave is granted for the attachment as requested (see the attached application). Applicant is allowed to repeat the attachment up to a maximum of 3 times within a timeframe of 30 days after the first attachment.

3.2.

The applicant’s claim against the debtor is estimated at € 2,663,391.80, including interest and costs.

3.3.

The time limit to initiate main proceedings is set at 14 days from the date after the first attachment is made.

3.4.

This judgment is enforceable notwithstanding appeal,

3.5.

This judgment is given under the condition that the judgment is served on the debtor prior to enforcement.

Done by L.S. Frakes, Judge, assisted by W.A. Visser, Clerk of the Court.

Issued in public on 17 July 2024.

APPROVED FOR DISTRIBUTION IN eNCC