- 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-183/23, Credit Agricole Bank Polska: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Śródmieścia w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 22 March 2023 — Credit Agricole Bank Polska SA v AB
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0183
62023CN0183
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
26.6.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 223/14
(Case C-183/23, Credit Agricole Bank Polska)
(2023/C 223/18)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Credit Agricole Bank Polska SA
Defendant: AB
Questions referred
1.Is Article 6(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 (recast) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the provisions of that regulation apply to the determination of jurisdiction in a case against a consumer in absentia who is not a national of any Member State and regarding whom, first, it is known that his or her last known place of residence was in a Member State and, second, there is credible evidence that he or she is no longer domiciled in the territory of that Member State, where there is no credible evidence suggesting that he or she has left the territory of the European Union to return to the State of which he or she is a national?
2.Is Article 26(1) and (2) of [Regulation No 1215/2012] to be interpreted as meaning that an appearance entered by a representative appointed in accordance with the national law of a Member State to represent that consumer in absentia replaces the appearance of the consumer and permits the assumption that a court of that Member State has jurisdiction despite the existence of credible evidence that the consumer is no longer domiciled in the territory of the Member State concerned?
(1) OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.