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-393/23, Athenian Brewery and Heineken: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 28 June 2023 — Athenian Brewery SA, Heineken NV v Macedonian Thrace Brewery SA

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0393

62023CN0393

June 28, 2023
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

Official Journal of the European Union

Series C

C/2023/115

16.10.2023

(Case C-393/23, Athenian Brewery and Heineken)

(C/2023/115)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Athenian Brewery SA, Heineken NV

Defendant: Macedonian Thrace Brewery SA

Questions referred

1.In a case such as that at issue in these proceedings, must the court of the parent company’s domicile, when assessing its jurisdiction under Article 8(1) of the Brussels Ia Regulation with regard to a subsidiary established in another Member State, in the context of the close-connection requirement referred to in that provision, rely on the presumption — accepted as regards substantive competition law — that the parent company exercises decisive influence on the economic activity of the subsidiary which is the subject of the proceedings?

2.If the first question is answered in the affirmative, how is the criterion formulated in the judgments Kolassa and Universal Music to be interpreted? In such a case, where the parent company’s decisive influence on the economic activity of the subsidiary is disputed, is it sufficient for the assumption of jurisdiction under Article 8(1) of the Brussels Ia Regulation as regards the subsidiary concerned, that the existence of such a decisive influence cannot be excluded a priori?

(1) 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 (OJ 2012 L 351, p. 289).

(2) C-375/13.

(3) C-12/15.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2023/115/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

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