- 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-641/16: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH v Expert France (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Insolvency proceedings — Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 — Court having jurisdiction — Action for unfair competition brought in the context of insolvency proceedings — Action brought by a company having its registered office in another Member State against the assignee of part of the business of a company subject to insolvency proceedings — Action not part of the proceedings or action deriving directly from those proceedings and closely connected with them)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0641
62016CA0641
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
8.1.2018
Official Journal of the European Union
C 5/14
(Case C-641/16) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Insolvency proceedings - Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 - Court having jurisdiction - Action for unfair competition brought in the context of insolvency proceedings - Action brought by a company having its registered office in another Member State against the assignee of part of the business of a company subject to insolvency proceedings - Action not part of the proceedings or action deriving directly from those proceedings and closely connected with them))
(2018/C 005/18)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Tünkers France, Tünkers Maschinenbau GmbH
Defendant: Expert France
Operative part of the judgment
Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that an action for damages for unfair competition by which the assignee of part of the business acquired in the course of insolvency proceedings is accused of misrepresenting itself as being the exclusive distributor of articles manufactured by the debtor does not fall within the jurisdiction of the court which opened the insolvency proceedings.
(<span class="note"> <a id="ntr1-C_2018005EN.01001401-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2018005EN.01001401-E0001">*1</a> </span>) Language of the case: French.
* * *
(2018/C 005/18)