- 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-568/20: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 7 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — J v H Limited (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Scope — Article 2(a) — Concept of ‘judgment’ — Order for payment made in another Member State after a summary contested examination of a judgment given in a third State — Article 39 — Enforceability in Member States)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62020CA0568
62020CA0568
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
30.5.2022
Official Journal of the European Union
C 213/13
(Case C-568/20) (*)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Scope - Article 2(a) - Concept of ‘judgment’ - Order for payment made in another Member State after a summary contested examination of a judgment given in a third State - Article 39 - Enforceability in Member States)
(2022/C 213/15)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: J
Defendant: H Limited
Operative part of the judgment
Article 2(a) and Article 39 of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that an order for payment made by a court of a Member State on the basis of final judgments delivered in a third State constitutes a judgment and is enforceable in the other Member States if it was made at the end of adversarial proceedings in the Member State of origin and was declared to be enforceable in that Member State. The fact that it is recognised as a judgment does not, however, deprive the party against whom enforcement is sought of the right to apply, pursuant to Article 46 of that regulation, for a refusal of enforcement on one of the grounds referred to in Article 45.
(*)
Language of the case: German
ECLI:EU:C:2025:140