Official Journal of the European Union

C 351/6

(Case C-366/14)

2014/C 351/07

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Herrenknecht AG

Defendant: Hév-Sugár Kft.

Questions referred

1.How should Article 23(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1), relating to the court which is to have exclusive jurisdiction, be interpreted where, in the terms and conditions of the contract, the contracting parties which are in dispute have attributed jurisdiction to hear disputes relating to the contract to various courts? Furthermore, is the applicant free to choose from among the courts selected the forum which has exclusive jurisdiction and those which have alternative jurisdiction and can the exclusive jurisdiction of the court which is hearing the case be inferred accordingly?

2.How should Article 3(1) of the Rome Convention (2), relating to the substantive law which is applicable in the event the contract is to be enforced, be interpreted where, in the terms and conditions of the contract, the parties have designated the laws of several Member States as relevant to the contract and, in those circumstances, which of those is the applicable law?

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).

Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations opened for signature in Rome on 19 June 1980 (OJ 1980 L 266, p. 1).