International Procedural Law: The ECJ confirms the validity of asymmetric jurisdiction clauses

In its judgment of February 27,2025 (C‑537/23 – Società Italiana Lastre SpA v. Agora SARL), the European Court of Justice (ECJ) made a significant contribution to the standardization and

legal certainty of European civil procedure law. The focus was on the question of whether asymmetric jurisdiction agreements, which grant one party – usually the creditor – the right to bring proceedings before other courts in addition to an agreed exclusive place of jurisdiction, are compatible with Article 25(1) of the Brussels I Regulation. The ECJ answered this question in the affirmative, thereby creating a binding legal basis for cross-border jurisdiction clauses, particularly in international commercial transactions.

Asymmetric clauses give one party extended standing to sue, while the other party remains bound to the specified place of jurisdiction. While German and Italian courts recognized their validity, the French Cour de cassation declared such clauses invalid in many cases, which led to considerable legal uncertainty.

In the underlying case, an Italian seller had agreed with a French buyer on a clause in favor of Italian courts, whereby the seller was also granted the right to bring legal action before other courts. The ECJ clarified that such an asymmetric clause is valid if it is clearly worded, limited to courts within the scope of the Brussels I Regulation or the Lugano Convention, and the restricted party to the agreement has agreed to it with full awareness of the legal consequences.

The ECJ emphasizes that the mere unilateral nature of the right to sue does not violate the EU law requirement of predictability. The decisive factor is transparency and comprehensibility for the bound party. The ruling thus strengthens private autonomy and confirms the admissibility of asymmetrical jurisdiction agreements, provided that they are designed in accordance with EU law.

Therefore, nothing prevents an agreement in which a German supplier and an Italian customer enter into a contract whereby the supplier may choose to take legal action either in the court of their place of business in Germany or in the court of the customer in Italy, while the customer is bound to the place of jurisdiction in Germany.

Back