Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document C2005/243/12

Case C-292/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio Patron by order of that court of 8 June 2005 in Irini Lekhoritou, V. Karkoulias, G. Pavlopoulos, P. Bratsikas, D. Sotiropoulos and G. Dimopoulos v the State of the Federal Republic of Germany

OJ C 243, 1.10.2005, p. 8–9 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

1.10.2005   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/8

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Efetio Patron by order of that court of 8 June 2005 in Irini Lekhoritou, V. Karkoulias, G. Pavlopoulos, P. Bratsikas, D. Sotiropoulos and G. Dimopoulos v the State of the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-292/05)

(2005/C 243/12)

Language of the case: Greek

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Efetio Patron (Court of Appeal, Patras) of 8 June 2005, received at the Court Registry on 20 July 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Irini Lekhoritou, V. Karkoulias, G. Pavlopoulos, P. Bratsikas, D. Sotiropoulos and G. Dimopoulos and the State of the Federal Republic of Germany on the following questions:

1.

Do actions for compensation which are brought by natural persons against a Contracting State as being liable under civil law for acts or omissions of its armed forces fall within the scope ratione materiae of the Brussels Convention in accordance with Article 1 thereof where those acts or omissions occurred during a military occupation of the plaintiffs' State of domicile following a war of aggression on the part of the defendant, are manifestly contrary to the law of war and may also be considered to be crimes against humanity?

2.

Is it compatible with the system of the Brussels Convention for the defendant State to put forward a plea of immunity, with the result, should the answer be in the affirmative, that the very application of the Convention is neutralised, in particular in respect of acts and omissions of the defendant's armed forces which occurred before the Convention entered into force, that is to say during the years 1941-44?
Top