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-194/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Slovenia) lodged on 19 March 2018 — Jadran Dodič v BANKA KOPER, ALTA INVEST

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CN0194

62018CN0194

March 19, 2018
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

C 190/10

(Case C-194/18)

(2018/C 190/13)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jadran Dodič

Respondents: BANKA KOPER, ALTA INVEST

Questions referred

1.Is Article 1(1) of Council Directive 2001/23/EC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that a transfer, such as that which took place in the circumstances of the present case, relating to financial instruments and other client assets (specifically, transferable securities), the accounts relating to clients’ intangible debt securities and other financial and ancillary services, as well as the records, must be deemed to be a legal transfer of an undertaking or of part of an undertaking, bearing in mind that, after the first respondent ceased to engage in business as a stock-exchange intermediary, the decision whether provision of such services was to be entrusted to the second defendant was, ultimately, a matter for the clients?

2.In the circumstances described above, is the number of clients who, following the cessation of the first respondent’s activities as a stock-exchange intermediary, now use the second respondent for the provision of those services, relevant?

3.Is the fact that the first respondent continues to provide services to the clients as a dependant financial promotion company and, in performing that role, cooperates with the second respondent, relevant in any way for the purpose of determining whether there was a transfer of a business or an undertaking?

Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees’ rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).

* * *

Language of the case: Slovenian

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