October 2026 at the Court of Justice of the European Union

The coming weeks will bring two developments in the case law of the Court of Justice in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters. 

The Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona in case C-697/25, Appenzell, is scheduled to be delivered on 1 October.

In September 2024, the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Office of Appenzell (Switzerland) issued a payment order against a debtor residing in Liechtenstein for outstanding lawyers’ fees, without requiring a prior enforceable title. The debtor did not lodge an objection within the ten-day period prescribed by Swiss law.

Upon application by the creditors, the Austrian court of first instance declared the payment order enforceable in Austria and authorised enforcement against the debtor. The appeal court subsequently dismissed the latter’s appeal against that declaration of enforceability. The debtor has brought an appeal on a point of law before the Austrian Supreme Court, contending that the payment order issued by the Appenzell Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Office does not constitute a judgment rendered by a court or tribunal within the meaning of Article 32 of the 2007 Lugano Convention. The Oberster Gerichtshof has referred the following question for a preliminary ruling:

‘Must an order for payment from a Swiss debt enforcement and insolvency office pursuant to Article 69 of the Swiss Federal Law on debt enforcement and bankruptcy and insolvency – which was issued not on the basis of an enforceable order previously obtained by the creditor but in the context of ‘collection without an enforceable instrument’ – be regarded as a judgment given by a court or tribunal within the meaning of Article 32 of the 2007 Lugano Convention?‘

The case has been assigned to a chamber of three judges, with O. Spineanu-Matei acting as Judge-Rapporteur.

On Thursday, 22 October, the Court of Justice will hand down its judgment in case C-873/24, Marwanak, previously examined here. In his Opinion delivered on 2 February 2026, Advocate General Szpunar proposed that the Court answer the questions referred by the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany) on  Regulation (EU) no 650/2012 as follows:

‘Article 68(l) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 […] must be interpreted as meaning that the authority issuing the European Certificate of Succession is not obliged to include therein, at the request of the applicant, information about immovable property located in another Member State that is included in the estate where the transfer of the estate takes place by way of universal succession. That is the case regardless of the requirements of the registration law of the Member State in which the inherited property is located with respect to the documents forming the basis for entries in the land register.‘

The case has been assigned to a five-members chamber, with N. Jääskinen acting as reporting judge.