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 62011CN0634

Case C-634/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Ireland (Ireland) made on 9 December 2011 — Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Ltd v Quinn Investments Sweden AB and others

OJ C 73, 10.3.2012, p. 15–16 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

10.3.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/15

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Ireland (Ireland) made on 9 December 2011 — Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Ltd v Quinn Investments Sweden AB and others

(Case C-634/11)

2012/C 73/28

Language of the case: English

Referring court

High Court of Ireland

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Anglo Irish Bank Corporation Ltd

Defendants: Quinn Investments Sweden AB, Sean Quinn, Ciara Quinn, Collette Quinn, Sean Quinn Junior, Brenda Quinn, Aoife Quinn, Stephen Kelly, Peter Darragh Quinn, Niall McPartland Indian Trust AB

Questions referred

1.

The within reference concerns Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (1) (‘Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001’) (‘Article 28’) and the procedures to be adopted by a national court (the courts of ‘State A’) in adjudicating upon an objection under Article 28 to the jurisdiction of that court to hear and determine a set of proceedings (‘the third proceedings’) in circumstances where the courts of State A are:-

(a)

seised first of a set of proceedings (‘the first proceedings’) which may be related to proceedings (‘the second proceedings’) commenced before the Courts of another Member State (‘State B’); and

(b)

seised also of a set of proceedings (‘the third proceedings’) which may be related to the second proceedings; and

(c)

presented with an objection pursuant to Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 to the jurisdiction of the Courts of State A to hear and determine the third proceedings based on an argument that the second proceedings (before the Courts of State B) and the third proceedings (before the Courts of State A) are related actions within the meaning of the said Article 28.

2.

Specifically, the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (the ‘Court of Justice’) is requested in relation to the following questions:

(1)

Whether it is necessary for the Courts of State A to await the outcome of an anticipated application to and decision by the Courts of State B as to whether or not the Courts of State B should stay or dismiss the second proceedings pursuant to Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 prior to the Courts of State A taking a decision on whether to stay or dismiss the third proceedings;

(2)

If it is not necessary for the Courts of State A to await the outcome of an anticipated application to and decision by the Courts of State B as to whether or not the Courts of State B should stay or dismiss the second proceedings pursuant to Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 prior to the Courts of State A taking a decision on whether to stay or dismiss the third proceedings, whether the Courts of State A are entitled to have regard to the fact of the first proceedings in deciding whether to stay or dismiss the third proceedings;

(3)

In the event that the Courts of State B decide that they do have jurisdiction over the second proceedings, whether the Courts of State A are entitled to have regard to the fact of the first proceedings in deciding whether to stay or dismiss the third proceedings pursuant to Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001;

(4)

Whether the fact that the third proceedings could have been (but were not) maintained as a counterclaim in the first proceedings by the Plaintiff in the third proceedings is a material factor and, if so, the proper considerations which the Courts of State A should afford to that factor in their determination as to whether they should decline jurisdiction over, or stay, the third proceedings pursuant to Article 28 of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001.

(1)  OJ L 12, p. 1

Top