Enforcement of a foreign maintenance judgment by garnishment order

Facts

A. and C., the divorced children of D. and B., live with their mother B. in Germany. D. resides in Switzerland. By judgment dated August 5, 2008, the Amtsgericht Ravensburg (Germany) ordered D. to pay monthly maintenance contributions to B. for A. and C. from March 1, 2008. As D. did not fulfill his obligations, B. initiated debt enforcement proceedings. In the debt enforcement proceedings, the President of the Amtsgericht Luzern-Land declared the German judgment enforceable in Switzerland.

By application dated April 14, 2010, A. and C., represented by their mother B., requested the Amtsgericht Luzern-Land to order D.'s respective employer to deduct the amount of CHF 1,482.95 per month from his salary and transfer it to their account. The Amtsgericht did not consider the application due to lack of local jurisdiction. The appeal against this decision was dismissed by the Obergericht of the Canton of Lucerne.

By appeal to the Federal Supreme Court, A. and C. requested the determination of the jurisdiction of the Bezirksgericht Kriens for their application for a garnishment order and the remission of the case to the Bezirksgericht Kriens for a decision on the merits.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court held that the garnishment order under Art. 291 of the Swiss Civil Code is not a measure for the protection of the property of the minor within the meaning of the Hague Convention on the Protection of Minors, but rather a measure of enforcement. Therefore, this Convention does not apply in the present case.

Instead, it must be examined whether the…