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
EN
2013/C 164/14
Language of the case: German
Applicant: eco cosmetics GmbH & Co. KG
Defendant: Virginie Laetitia Barbara Dupuy
1.Must Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure be interpreted to mean that a defendant may apply for a review by the competent court of the European order for payment also where the order for payment was not served on him or not effectively served on him? In those circumstances, may recourse be had, mutatis mutandis, in particular to Article 20(1) or Article 20(2) of Regulation No 1896/2006?
2.If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: If the order for payment was not served on him or not effectively served on him, must the defendant respect certain time-limits in bringing his application for review? In that connection, must recourse be had in particular to the scheme established in Article 20(3) of Regulation No 1896/2006?
3.Also if Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: What are the legal consequences for the procedure if the application for review is successful; may recourse be had in that connection, mutatis mutandis, in particular to Article 20(3) or Article 17(1) of Regulation No 1896/2006?
Language of the case: German.
* * *