- 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-887/24, Widl: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht München (Germany) lodged on 20 December 2024 – YH v Widl GmbH
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0887
62024CN0887
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 series
—
C/2025/3391
30.6.2025
(Case C-887/24, Widl)
(C/2025/3391)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: YH
Defendant: Widl GmbH
Questions referred:
Must Article 3 of Directive 98/37/EC (<span class="oj-super oj-note-tag">1</span>) of 22 June 1998, in conjunction with Annex I thereto, and in particular points 1.1.2., 1.2.1., 1.2.2., 1.2.4., 1.2.6., 1.2.7. and 2.3.(c) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that the emergency stop device on a circular saw complies with the safety requirements laid down therein if, after an emergency stop command has been triggered, re-actuating the emergency stop device – consciously or unconsciously – repeatedly or continuously, for at least 4 to 5 seconds, interrupts the braking action, with the result that the saw blade does not come to a stop, but runs down silently for approximately 11 minutes?
Must Article 3 of Directive 98/37/EC of 22 June 1998, in conjunction with point 1.2.4 of Annex I thereto, be interpreted as meaning that unconscious or inadvertent (renewed) triggering of the emergency stop command during the braking period also constitutes an ‘operation’ within the meaning of that provision?
If 2(a) is to be answered in the affirmative, does such unconscious or inadvertent actuation constitute an ‘appropriate operation’ for disengaging the device within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 98/37/EC of 22 June 1998, in conjunction with point 1.2.4. of Annex I thereto?
Must Article 3 of Directive 98/37/EC of 22 June 1998, in conjunction with point 1.2.4 of Annex I thereto, be interpreted as meaning that only conscious and intentional (renewed) actuation of the emergency stop device constitutes an ‘operation’ within the meaning of that provision?
If 3(a) is to be answered in the affirmative, does such conscious and intentional actuation constitute an ‘appropriate operation’ for disengaging the device within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 98/37/EC of 22 June 1998, in conjunction with point 1.2.4 of Annex I thereto?
—
Directive 98/37/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to machinery (OJ 1998 L 207, p. 1).
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3391/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—