- 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-441/13: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 January 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Handelsgericht Wien — Austria) — Pez Hejduk v EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 5(3) — Special jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict — Copyright — Dematerialised content — Placing online — Determination of the place of the event giving rise to the damage — Criteria)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CA0441
62013CA0441
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
30.3.2015
Official Journal of the European Union
C 107/7
(Case C-441/13) (*)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 5(3) - Special jurisdiction in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict - Copyright - Dematerialised content - Placing online - Determination of the place of the event giving rise to the damage - Criteria))
(2015/C 107/08)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Pez Hejduk
Defendant: EnergieAgentur.NRW GmbH
Operative part of the judgment
Article 5(3) 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, in the event of an allegation of infringement of copyright and rights related to copyright guaranteed by the Member State of the court seised, that court has jurisdiction, on the basis of the place where the damage occurred, to hear an action for damages in respect of an infringement of those rights resulting from the placing of protected photographs online on a website accessible in its territorial jurisdiction. That court has jurisdiction only to rule on the damage caused in the Member State within which the court is situated.
(*)
Language of the case: German.
ECLI:EU:C:2015:140