Seite - 61 - in Austrian Law Journal, Band 2/2017

ALJ 2/2017 Provisional Account Preservation Measures in European Civil Procedure Law 61 i. Sections 3, 4 or 5 of Chapter II where the policyholder, the insured, a beneficiary of the insurance contract, the injured party, the consumer or the employee was the de- fendant; or ii. Section 624 of Chapter II. Such an application shall be submitted to the court which the Member State concerned has communicated to the Commission pursuant to Article 75 point a Brussels Ia Regulation (Art. 47 para. 1 and Art. 45 para. 4 Brussels Ia Regulation). In Austria, the competent court is the respective lower regional court (Bezirksgericht) that is competent for the enforcement of that very judge- ment.25 Slovenia declared the district courts (okrožna sodišča) to be competent to decide on an application. The application is generally carried out according to national civil procedure law (Art. 47 para. 2 Brussels Ia Regulation); however, Art. 47 para. 3 and 4 Brussels Ia Regulation contain some special provisions regarding the documents that need to be provided as well as the (general) prohibition to require the applicant to have a postal address in the Member State addressed. B. Implementation and Effects of the Interim Measure 1. Implementation and Effects according to Brussels Ia It is well established 26 that a foreign judgment which has been recognised (according to Art. 36 Brussels Ia Regulation or the previously applicable provisions) “must in principle have the same effects in the State in which enforcement is sought as it does in the State in which the judgment was given”.27 Any other solution would imply that a judgment could have different effects in the Mem- ber State of origin and the Member State of enforcement, thereby obstructing the free move- ment of judgments.28 The free circulation of judgments, however, is one of the primary goals of the Brussels Ia Regulation,29 and the (spatial) extension of the effects of the recognised decision is unanimously considered the most appropriate instrument to reach this goal.30 The limit for the extension is the ordre public of the Member State of recognition.31 The Brussels Ia Regulation does not contain any specific provisions on the implementation of a foreign interim measure. It therefore has to be carried out in accordance with national (enforce- ment) law. However, it is possible for it to contain a measure or an order unknown in the law of the Member State addressed. In this case that measure or order shall, to the extent possible, be adapted to a measure or an order known in the law of that Member State which has equivalent effects attached to it and which pursues similar aims and interests (Art. 54 para. 1 subpara. 1 Brus- 24 This section contains rules on exclusive jurisdiction. 25 Thomas Garber, in INTERNATIONALES ZIVILVERFAHRENSRECHT Art. 47 EuGVVO ¶ 1 (Alfred Burgstaller et al. eds., 2015); Kodek, supra note 17, at Art. 47 EuGVVO ¶ 1; Köllensperger, supra note 22, at 58. 26 For previously dominant theories cf. Leible, supra note 12, at Art. 36 Brüssel Ia-VO ¶ 4. 27 Case C-145/86, Hoffmann/Krieg, 1988, ECLI:EU:C:1988:61; Hess, supra note 12, at Art. 36 EuGVVO ¶ 2–3. 28 Leible, supra note 12, at Art. 36 Brüssel Ia-VO ¶ 4. 29 Cf. Recitals 1, 6, 27 and 33; Dörner, supra note 20, at Vorbem zu Art. 36–57 EuGVVO ¶ 1. 30 THOMAS GARBER, EINSTWEILIGER RECHTSSCHUTZ NACH DER EUGVVO – DIE INTERNATIONALE ZUSTÄNDIGKEIT FÜR DIE ERLASSUNG EINSTWEILIGER MAßNAHMEN UND DEREN ANERKENNUNG UND VOLLSTRECKUNG NACH DER EUGVVO 270 (2011); Leible, supra note 12, at Art. 36 Brüssel Ia-VO ¶ 4; Bettina Nunner-Krautgasser, Die Anerkennung und Vollstreckung englischer freezing injunctions in Österreich, 58 ÖSTERREICHISCHES BANKARCHIV 794, 797 (2010). 31 Leible, supra note 12, at Art. 36 Brüssel Ia-VO ¶ 4.