- 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-494/23, Mahá: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 4 October 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud – Czech Republic) – QE, IJ v DP, EB (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Article 1(1) – Scope – Civil and commercial matters – Concept – Proceedings seeking to substitute the defendant’s consent to the release of property seized by the law enforcement authorities from the custody of the court – Article 8(2) – Application to intervene – Concept of third party)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0494
62023CA0494
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/2024/6898
25.11.2024
(Case C-494/23, Mahá)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 1(1) - Scope - Civil and commercial matters - Concept - Proceedings seeking to substitute the defendant’s consent to the release of property seized by the law enforcement authorities from the custody of the court - Article 8(2) - Application to intervene - Concept of ‘third party’)
(C/2024/6898)
Language of the case: Czech
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: QE, IJ
Defendants: DP, EB
Operative part of the judgment
Article 1(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
must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’, within the meaning of that provision, does not include an action seeking to substitute the defendant’s consent in the context of an application to release an item from the custody of the court; whereas that action constitutes proceedings that are incidental to the proceedings to place the item seized by the law enforcement authorities into the custody of the court.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6898/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—