He lives in the Netherlands and doesn't want to be sued in Poland for using his apartment. The CJEU ruled.

This is one of the decisions in the latest CJEU judgment, which clarifies the rules for conducting a cross-border dispute over payment for the non-contractual use of premises in Poland by a Polish woman who has been living in the Netherlands for many years.

The District Court in Koszalin, which was handling a case concerning the non-contractual use of premises belonging to the local commune, applied to the CJEU to resolve these complex issues.

Unauthorized use of real estate. The entire family was sued.

After terminating the lease and ordering the eviction of four residents, the municipality filed a lawsuit against them, demanding payment for unauthorized use of the premises, specifying the residential addresses of all defendants in Poland. A payment order was issued in the case, which was collected at the address in Poland by one of the defendants (also on behalf of the others).

In its objection to this order, one of these individuals requested a re-examination of the case and dismissal of the claim against them, pointing out that they had been exclusively resident in the Netherlands since 2007 and had never entered into a lease agreement with the municipality. The municipality, in turn, emphasized that Polish courts had jurisdiction in this case because the defendants had a strong bond, were related, and lived together in the premises. Therefore, it was desirable to hear the claims for payment filed against them jointly.

To this end, the district court referred a question to the CJEU, seeking to determine whether civil proceedings under EU law are initiated when the defendant files a lawsuit or requests a review of the case. It also asked whether a claim for compensation for the unauthorized occupation of another person's real estate after the end of a lease agreement constitutes a claim "concerning rights in rem in immovable property and the leasing or tenancy of immovable property" within the meaning of, among other things, Article 22(1) of EU Regulation No. 44/2001 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters. This is an important question, as this provision provides for exclusive jurisdiction (i.e., the right to hear the case) for such disputes by the court of the country where the property is located (i.e., Poland).

Where can a municipality sue for unauthorized use of premises? The CJEU indicated

The CJEU responded that court proceedings should be deemed to have been initiated, for the purposes of EU law, on the day on which the plaintiff filed an action in the case in which the judgment was given, and not on the day on which the defendant filed an objection to that judgment in order to have the case reviewed.

The Court also pointed out that proceedings for the payment of compensation for the non-contractual occupation of immovable property following the termination of a lease agreement for that property, located in a Member State other than the defendant's country of residence, are not proceedings "concerning rights in rem in immovable property" and do not fall within the scope of the concept of "leasing or leasing of immovable property" within the meaning of Article 22(1) of Regulation No 44/2001. A claim for compensation for the non-contractual occupation of immovable property (i.e. in connection with an event giving rise to damages) should therefore be treated as a tort or a similar act.

The CJEU also indicated that a person domiciled in a Member State may be sued in the court of the place where one of several defendants resides, provided that their actions are so closely connected at the time the action is brought that it is advisable to hear them together in order to avoid irreconcilable judgments.

Case number: C-99/24