EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-249/16: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 2 May 2016 — Saale Kareda v Stefan Benkö

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CN0249

62016CN0249

May 2, 2016
With Google you find a lot.
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

22.8.2016

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/12

(Case C-249/16)

(2016/C 305/17)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant on a point of law: Saale Kareda

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Stefan Benkö

Questions referred

1.Must Article 7(1) 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 (1) (‘Regulation No 1215/2012’) be interpreted as meaning that, where a debtor under a (joint) credit agreement with a bank has, on his own, made the repayments due under that credit agreement, a reimbursement claim (compensation/recourse claim) brought by that debtor against the other debtor under that credit agreement constitutes a derived (secondary) contractual claim arising from that credit agreement?

If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: Is the place of performance of a debtor’s reimbursement claim (compensation/recourse claim) against the other debtor arising out of the underlying credit agreement to be determined

in accordance with the second indent of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 1215/2012 (‘provision of services’) or

in accordance with Article 7(1)(c), in conjunction with Article 7(1)(a), of Regulation No 1215/2012 on the basis of the lex causae?

3.If Question 2.a is answered in the affirmative: Is the service characterising the credit agreement the granting of the loans by the bank, and is, therefore, the place of performance of that service determined in accordance with the second indent of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 1215/2012 by the registered office of the bank, if the loans were provided exclusively at that place?

If Question 2.b is answered in the affirmative: For the purpose of determining the place of performance for the non-performed contractual obligation in accordance with Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation No 1215/2012, is the decisive date

a.the date on which the two debtors took out the loans (March 2007) or

b.the dates on which the loan debtor entitled to recourse made to the bank the payments from which he derives the recourse claim (June 2012 to June 2014)?

(1) OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia