Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017CN0111

Case C-111/17 PPU: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Monomeles Protodikeio Athens (Greece) lodged on 7 March 2017 — OL v PQ

OJ C 144, 8.5.2017, p. 32–32 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

8.5.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 144/32


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Monomeles Protodikeio Athens (Greece) lodged on 7 March 2017 — OL v PQ

(Case C-111/17 PPU)

(2017/C 144/42)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Monomeles Protodikeio Athens (Greece)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: OL

Defendant: PQ

Question referred

What is the appropriate interpretation of the concept of ‘habitual residence’, within the meaning of Article 11(1) of Regulation (ΕC) No 2201/2003 (1) concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, in the case of an infant who fortuitously or due to force majeure has been born in a place other than that which her parents with joint parental responsibility for the child intended to be the place of her habitual residence, and was then unlawfully retained by one parent in the State where she was born, or removed to a third State. More specifically, is physical presence a necessary and self-evident prerequisite, in all circumstances, for establishing the habitual residence of a person, and in particular a new-born child?


(1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.


Top