Facts
M., a Brazilian national, filed a claim against V., a Swiss-Italian dual citizen, with the District Court of Zurich on July 19, 2000, for the determination of paternity and maintenance for her son S. The District Court did not enter into the claim due to lack of international jurisdiction. Thereupon, M. and S. appealed to the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, which upheld the appeal and remanded the case to the District Court for supplementation of the proceedings and a new decision.
V. filed a federal appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting that the decision of the High Court be overturned and that the claim not be entered into due to lack of international jurisdiction. The main issue in dispute is when the domicile of the defendant is decisive for international jurisdiction.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, insofar as it was entered into. It stated that the principle of perpetuatio fori also applies in the international context. The decisive factor for determining international jurisdiction is the time of the initiation of the conciliation proceedings on June 8, 2000, when the defendant still had his domicile in Switzerland. Even if the defendant should have subsequently transferred his domicile to Italy, this does not change the international jurisdiction of the Swiss court once it has been established.
The Federal Supreme Court saw no reason to deviate from the principle of perpetuatio fori.…