When you visit our website, our website may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly through the use of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mainly used to make the site work as you expect it to and to provide you with a more personalised web experience. Because we respect your right to data protection, you have the option to choose to accept or reject cookies via the cookie banner. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer. More information in our Cookie Policy.
The “Löber” case in the era of digital banking
Estimated time to read this article
2 minDate of publication
10 April 2019Author(s)
Thomas DervalCategories
Banking, Finance and Insurance, Digital Finance and FinTech, Dispute resolutionIn the era of digital banking, does it still make sense to use the localisation of a bank account to settle conflicts of jurisdiction?
In its recent case “Löber”, the ECJ decided that tort claims against the issuer of a misleading prospectus may be brought before the courts of the investor’s domicile provided that his or her investment originated from a bank account localised in the same jurisdiction and that ‘other specific circumstances’ also contribute to the jurisdiction of these courts. A decision which goes against the current digital flow? Discover Thomas Derval‘s opinion on this case in the Journal de droit européen: http://bit.ly/lober-ecj (in French – reserved to subscribers).