- 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-389/23, Bulgarfrukt: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 5 December 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Wedding – Germany) – Bulgarfrukt – Fruchthandels GmbH v Oranzherii Gimel II EOOD (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – European order for payment procedure – Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 – European order for payment declared enforceable – Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 – Invalid service ascertained during enforcement – National legislation providing for a legal remedy enabling the defendant to apply for the annulment of a European order for payment – Legal consequences – Obligation of the court seised to annul the European order for payment)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0389
62023CA0389
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/2025/514
(Case C-389/23,
Bulgarfrukt)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - European order for payment procedure - Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 - European order for payment declared enforceable - Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters - Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 - Invalid service ascertained during enforcement - National legislation providing for a legal remedy enabling the defendant to apply for the annulment of a European order for payment - Legal consequences - Obligation of the court seised to annul the European order for payment)
(C/2025/514)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Bulgarfrukt – Fruchthandels GmbH
Defendant: Oranzherii Gimel II EOOD
Operative part of the judgment
The provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure, read in conjunction with those of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters,
must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which, where a European order for payment has not been served on the defendant or has not been served on him or her in a manner which complies with the minimum standards laid down in Articles 13 to 15 of Regulation No 1896/2006, the court before which a remedy against that order is sought is obliged to annul that order.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/514/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—