The paper discusses international jurisdiction in cases based on actio pauliana under the Brussels Ia Regulation, especially with regard to the principles, objectives and policies of EU private international law. It concentrates on the assessment of various heads of jurisdiction that could possibly apply to actio pauliana. To that end, the CJEU case law was thoroughly analysed alongside international legal scholarship. As to the jurisdictional characterisation of actio pauliana, the primary role should be assigned to teleological and systematic considerations. Actio pauliana can neither be characterised as an issue relating to torts nor as a right in rem in immovable property. Contrary to the recent position adopted by the CJEU, it should also be deemed not to fall within matters relating to a contract. The characterisation of actio pauliana as a provisional measure or an enforcement mechanism for jurisdictional purposes is equally incorrect.

本文讨论了布鲁塞尔 Ia 条例下基于行动保理的案件中的国际管辖权，特别是关于欧盟国际私法的原则、目标和政策。它集中于对可能适用于保利安娜诉讼的各种司法管辖区负责人的评估。为此，对欧洲法院判例法与国际法律学术进行了彻底的分析。至于保理诉讼的管辖权特征，应将主要作用分配给目的论和系统性考虑。Actio pauliana既不能被描述为与侵权有关的问题，也不能被描述为对物权利在不动产中。与欧盟法院最近采取的立场相反，它也应被视为不属于与合同有关的事项。将保利行为定性为临时措施或出于管辖目的的执行机制同样不正确。