EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CN0541
Case C-541/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno Sodišče Republike Slovenije (Republic of Slovenia) lodged on 25 October 2011 — Jožef Grilc v Slovensko zavarovalno združenje GIZ
Case C-541/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno Sodišče Republike Slovenije (Republic of Slovenia) lodged on 25 October 2011 — Jožef Grilc v Slovensko zavarovalno združenje GIZ
Case C-541/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno Sodišče Republike Slovenije (Republic of Slovenia) lodged on 25 October 2011 — Jožef Grilc v Slovensko zavarovalno združenje GIZ
OJ C 25, 28.1.2012, p. 31–31
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
28.1.2012 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 25/31 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno Sodišče Republike Slovenije (Republic of Slovenia) lodged on 25 October 2011 — Jožef Grilc v Slovensko zavarovalno združenje GIZ
(Case C-541/11)
(2012/C 25/54)
Language of the case: Slovenian
Referring court
Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Jožef Grilc
Defendant: Slovensko zavarovalno združenje GIZ
Question referred
Where a person has suffered damage as a result of a road traffic accident that occurred in a Member State other than his State of residence and was caused by a vehicle insured and normally based in a Member State, must the second subparagraph of Article 6(1) of Directive 2000/26/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that the compensation body of the Member State of residence of the injured party has the capacity to be a party to legal proceedings instituted by the injured party in order to obtain compensation if, within three months of the injured party’s presenting his claim to the insurance undertaking responsible for the vehicle which caused the damage or its claims representative, neither the insurance undertaking nor its claims representative has provided a reasoned reply to the claim?