Som begrundelse for denne rets kompetence påberåbte sagsøgeren sig blandt andet domskonventionens artikel 5, nr. 5, og hævdede, at sagsøgte drev en filial i Heidelberg.
In sup­port of its contention that the Landgericht had jurisdiction the plaintiff relied inter alia on Article 5(5) of the Brussels Convention and stated that the defendant maintained a branch in Heidelberg.