This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CN0265
Case C-265/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 26 April 2021 — AB, AB-CD v Z EF
Case C-265/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 26 April 2021 — AB, AB-CD v Z EF
Case C-265/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 26 April 2021 — AB, AB-CD v Z EF
OJ C 263, 5.7.2021, p. 10–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
5.7.2021 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 263/10 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 26 April 2021 — AB, AB-CD v Z EF
(Case C-265/21)
(2021/C 263/14)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Cour d’appel de Bruxelles
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellants: AB, AB-CD
Respondent: Z EF
Questions referred
1. |
Must the concept of ‘matters relating to a contract’, within the meaning of Article 5(1) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) (‘the Brussels I Regulation’):
|
2. |
Does the concept of ‘action’ on which the applicant ‘relies’, like the criterion used to distinguish whether an action comes under the concept of matters relating to a contract, within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the Brussels I Regulation, or under ‘matters relating to tort, delict or quasi-delict’, within the meaning of Article 5(3) of that regulation (C-59/19, paragraph 32), entail verification of whether the interpretation of the legal obligation freely assumed seems to be indispensable for the purpose of assessing the basis of the action? |
3. |
Does the legal action whereby an applicant seeks a declaration that he or she is the owner of an asset in his or her possession in reliance on a double contract of sale, the first entered into by the original joint owner of that asset (the spouse of the defendant, who is also an original joint owner) with the person who sold the asset to the applicant, and the second between the latter two parties, come within the concept of matters relating to a contract within the meaning of Article 5(1) of the Brussels I Regulation?
|
4. |
Must Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I) (2) be interpreted as applying to the situation referred to by the third question referred for a preliminary ruling and, if so, which contract must be taken into consideration? |