Judgment of the Court; 31 March 1982; C.H.W. v G.J.H.; in Case 25/81

1. An application for provisional measures to secure the delivery up of a document in order to prevent it from being used as evidence in an action concerning a husband's management of his wife's property does not fall within the scope of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters if such management is closely connected with the proprietary relationship resulting directly from the marriage bond.

2. Article 24 of the Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters may not be relied on to bring within the scope of the Convention provisional or protective measures relating to matters which are excluded from it.

3. Article 18 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters must be interpreted as meaning that it allows the defendant not only to contest the jurisdiction but to submit at the same time in the alternative a defence on the substance of the action without however losing the right to raise an objection of lack of jurisdiction.