Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62014CA0004

    Case C-4/14: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Christophe Bohez v Ingrid Wiertz (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Articles 1(2) and 49 — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Matters excluded — Family law — Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 — Article 47(1) — Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matters of parental responsibility — Judgment concerning rights of access which imposes a periodic penalty payment — Enforcement of that penalty payment)

    OJ C 363, 3.11.2015, p. 6–7 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    3.11.2015   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 363/6


    Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 9 September 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — Christophe Bohez v Ingrid Wiertz

    (Case C-4/14) (1)

    ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Articles 1(2) and 49 - Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Matters excluded - Family law - Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 - Article 47(1) - Jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matters of parental responsibility - Judgment concerning rights of access which imposes a periodic penalty payment - Enforcement of that penalty payment))

    (2015/C 363/07)

    Language of the case: Finnish

    Referring court

    Korkein oikeus

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant: Christophe Bohez

    Respondent: Ingrid Wiertz

    Operative part of the judgment

    1.

    Article 1 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 must be interpreted as meaning that that regulation does not apply to the enforcement in a Member State of a penalty payment which is imposed in a judgment, given in another Member State, concerning rights of custody and rights of access in order to ensure that the holder of the rights of custody complies with those rights of access.

    2.

    Recovery of a penalty payment — a penalty which the court of the Member State of origin that gave judgment on the merits with regard to rights of access has imposed in order to ensure the effectiveness of those rights — forms part of the same scheme of enforcement as the judgment concerning the rights of access that the penalty safeguards and the latter must therefore be declared enforceable in accordance with the rules laid down by Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000.

    3.

    In the context of Regulation No 2201/2003, a foreign judgment which orders a periodic penalty payment is enforceable in the Member State in which enforcement is sought only if the amount of the payment has been finally determined by the courts of the Member State of origin.


    (1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.


    Top