- 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-183/23, Credit Agricole Bank Polska: Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 11 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy – Śródmieścia w Warszawie - Poland) – Credit Agricole Bank Polska S.A. v AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters – Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 – Article 6(1) – Scope – Contract concluded by a consumer who is a national of a third State with a bank established in a Member State – Proceedings brought against that consumer – Court of the last known domicile of the consumer in a Member State)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0183
62023CA0183
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/2024/3289
(Case C-183/23,
Credit Agricole Bank Polska)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 - Article 6(1) - Scope - Contract concluded by a consumer who is a national of a third State with a bank established in a Member State - Proceedings brought against that consumer - Court of the last known domicile of the consumer in a Member State)
(C/2024/3289)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Credit Agricole Bank Polska S.A.
Defendant: AB
Operative part of the judgment
Article 6(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
must be interpreted as meaning that, where the last known domicile of a defendant who is a national of a third State and a consumer is situated in the Member State of the court seised of the matter, and that court is unable to identify the current domicile of the defendant and has no firm evidence to support the conclusion that the defendant is in fact domiciled in another Member State or outside the European Union, jurisdiction to hear the matter is determined not by the law of the Member State of that court, but by Article 18(2) of that regulation, which confers jurisdiction to hear the matter on the court within whose judicial district the defendant’s last known domicile is situated.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3289/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—
* * *
(*1) Language of the case: Polish.