The Court of Justice delivered today its judgement in case C‑304/17 (Helga Löber v Barclays Bank plc), which builds on the Kolassa judgment against the same bank:

“Article 5(3) of [Brussels I]must be interpreted to the effect that in a situation, such as that in the main proceedings, in which an investor brings, on the basis of the prospectus relating to a certificate in which he or she invested, a tort action against the bank which issued that certificate, the courts of that investor’s domicile, as the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred within the meaning of that provision, have jurisdiction to hear and determine that action, where the damage the investor claims to have suffered consists in financial loss which occurred directly in that investor’s bank account with a bank established within the jurisdiction of those courts and the other specific circumstances of that situation also contribute to attributing jurisdiction to those courts”.

Source: here