Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
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

Document 62018CN0183

    Case C-183/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Południe w Gdańsku (Poland) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie (CJIB) v Bank BGŻ BNP Paribas S.A. in Gdańsk

    OJ C 221, 25.6.2018, p. 5–6 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    201806080501931642018/C 221/061832018CJC22120180625EN01ENINFO_JUDICIAL201803095622

    Case C-183/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Południe w Gdańsku (Poland) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie (CJIB) v Bank BGŻ BNP Paribas S.A. in Gdańsk

    Top

    C2212018EN520120180309EN00065262

    Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Południe w Gdańsku (Poland) lodged on 9 March 2018 — Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie (CJIB) v Bank BGŻ BNP Paribas S.A. in Gdańsk

    (Case C-183/18)

    2018/C 221/06Language of the case: Polish

    Referring court

    Sąd Rejonowy Gdańsk-Południe w Gdańsku

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau, Ministerie van Veiligheid en Justitie (CJIB)

    Defendant: Bank BGŻ BNP Paribas S.A. in Gdańsk

    Questions referred

    1.

    Should the provisions of Article 1(a), Article 9(3) and Article 20(1) and (2)(b) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties ( 1 ) be interpreted as meaning that a decision transmitted for execution which imposes a financial penalty on a legal person should be executed in the executing State despite the fact that the national provisions implementing that framework decision do not provide for the possibility of executing a decision which imposes such a penalty on a legal person?

    2.

    In the event of an affirmative answer to the first question, must the term ‘legal person’ as used in Article 1(a) and Article 9(3) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA be interpreted:

    a.

    in accordance with the law of the issuing State (Article 1(c));

    b.

    in accordance with the law of the executing State (Article 1(d));

    c.

    as an autonomous concept of EU law,

    and, as a consequence, does it also cover a branch of a legal person notwithstanding the fact that that branch does not have legal personality in the executing State?

    ( 1 ) OJ 2005 L 76, pp 16-30.

    Top