This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CN0460
Case C-460/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2014 — Johannes Evert Antonius Massar v DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV
Case C-460/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2014 — Johannes Evert Antonius Massar v DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV
Case C-460/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2014 — Johannes Evert Antonius Massar v DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV
OJ C 448, 15.12.2014, p. 12–12
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
15.12.2014 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 448/12 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 6 October 2014 — Johannes Evert Antonius Massar v DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV
(Case C-460/14)
(2014/C 448/15)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Johannes Evert Antonius Massar
Defendant: DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV
Questions referred
|
1) |
Must the term ‘inquiry’ in Article 4(1)(a) of Council Directive 87/344/EEC (1) of 22 June 1987 on the coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to legal expenses insurance be interpreted as covering the procedure before the UWV [Uitvoeringsinstituut Werknemersverzekeringen (Employee Insurance Agency)], in which the employer requests a dismissal permit in order to bring to an end the employment contract with the employee (who is covered by legal expenses insurance)? |
|
2) |
If the answer to Question 1 depends on the characteristics of the specific procedure, in combination, if necessary, with the facts and circumstances of the case, on the basis of which characteristics, facts and circumstances must the national court then determine whether that procedure is to be regarded as constituting an inquiry within the meaning of Article 4(1)(a) of the Directive? |