- 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-108/23, SmartSport Reisen: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Groß-Gerau (Germany) lodged on 23 February 2023 — PU v SmartSport Reisen GmbH
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0108
62023CN0108
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
15.5.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 173/20
(Case C-108/23, SmartSport Reisen)
(2023/C 173/28)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: PU
Defendant: SmartSport Reisen GmbH
Question referred
Is Article 18(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 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that, in addition to regulating international jurisdiction, the provision also lays down a rule to be observed by the adjudicating court as to the territorial jurisdiction of the national courts in matters pertaining to travel contracts where both the consumer, as the traveller, and his or her contractual partner, as the tour operator, are domiciled in the same Member State, however the destination is not in that Member State but is located abroad, with the consequence that the consumer can bring contractual claims against the tour operator before the court for his or her place of domicile as a supplement to national rules?
(1) OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.