- 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-302/23, Piekiewicz: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Katowice — Wschód w Katowicach (Poland) lodged on 10 May 2023 — M. J. v C. J.
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0302
62023CN0302
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
14.8.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 286/22
(Case C-302/23, Piekiewicz (1))
(2023/C 286/27)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: M. J.
Defendant: C. J.
Question referred
Must Article 2(1) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC, (2) in conjunction with Article 25(1) and (2) thereof, and recitals 12, 13, 18, 21, 22 and 49 thereof, be interpreted as meaning that a court of a Member State is obliged to accept a procedural document lodged with that court and signed with an electronic signature, as referred to in Article 3(10) of the regulation, where the national law of the Member State does not provide for any possibility of lodging procedural documents with the court by means of an electronic signature other than through an ICT system?
(1) This case has been given a fictitious name which does not correspond to the real name of either of the parties to the proceedings.
(2) OJ 2014 L 257, p .73.