- 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-1/13: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 27 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — Cartier parfums — lunettes SAS, Axa Corporate Solutions assurances SA v Ziegler France SA, Montgomery Transports SARL, Inko Trade s.r.o., Jaroslav Matěja, Groupama Transport (Request for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 27(2) — Lis pendens — Article 24 — Prorogation of jurisdiction — Establishment of jurisdiction of the court first seised by reason of appearance being entered without objection by the parties or the adoption of a final judgment)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CA0001
62013CA0001
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 112/12
(Case C-1/13) (<span class="super">1</span>)
((Request for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 27(2) - Lis pendens - Article 24 - Prorogation of jurisdiction - Establishment of jurisdiction of the court first seised by reason of appearance being entered without objection by the parties or the adoption of a final judgment))
2014/C 112/14
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Cartier parfums — lunettes SAS, Axa Corporate Solutions assurances SA
Defendants: Ziegler France SA, Montgomery Transports SARL, Inko Trade s.r.o., Jaroslav Matěja, Groupama Transport
Re:
Request for a preliminary ruling — Cour de cassation (France) — Interpretation of Article 27(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001, L 12, p. 1) — Lis pendens — Establishment of the jurisdiction of the court first seised because neither party has claimed that it lacks jurisdiction or because it has adopted a decision which is irrevocable for any reason whatsoever.
Operative part of the judgment
Article 27(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that, except in the situation where the court second seised has exclusive jurisdiction by virtue of that regulation, the jurisdiction of the court first seised must be regarded as being established, within the meaning of that provision, if that court has not declined jurisdiction of its own motion and none of the parties has contested its jurisdiction prior to or up to the time at which a position is adopted which is regarded in national procedural law as being the first defence on the substance submitted before that court.
*
Language of the case: French.
ECLI:EU:C:2014:140
* * *
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 63, 2.3.2013.