- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-291/21, Starkinvest: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 20 April 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège — Belgium) — Proceedings brought by Starkinvest SRL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 — European Account Preservation Order procedure — Conditions for issuing a preservation order — Article 4 — Concept of ‘judgment’ — Article 7 — Concept of ‘judgment requiring the debtor to pay the creditor’s claim’ — Judgment ordering a party to make a penalty payment for breach of a prohibitory order — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Article 55 — Scope)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CA0291
62021CA0291
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 205/3
(Case C-291/21, (1) Starkinvest)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 - European Account Preservation Order procedure - Conditions for issuing a preservation order - Article 4 - Concept of ‘judgment’ - Article 7 - Concept of ‘judgment requiring the debtor to pay the creditor’s claim’ - Judgment ordering a party to make a penalty payment for breach of a prohibitory order - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 55 - Scope)
(2023/C 205/04)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Starkinvest SRL
Operative part of the judgment
Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 655/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a European Account Preservation Order procedure to facilitate cross-border debt recovery in civil and commercial matters
must be interpreted as meaning that a judgment that orders a debtor to make a penalty payment in the event of a future breach of a prohibitory order and that therefore does not definitively set the amount of that penalty payment does not constitute a judgment requiring the debtor to pay the creditor’s claim, within the meaning of that provision, such that the creditor who requests a European Account Preservation Order is not exempt from the obligation to provide sufficient evidence to satisfy the court before which an application for that order is brought that he or she is likely to succeed on the substance of his or her claim against the debtor.
(1) OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.
* * *
ECLI:EU:C:2023:140