Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62022CA0466

    Case C-466/22,  V.B. Trade: Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 February 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo – Bulgaria) – V.B. Trade OOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ – Veliko Tarnovo (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Internal market – Electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions – Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 – Article 25 – Electronic signatures – Legal effect and evidential value in legal proceedings – Concept of ‘qualified electronic signature’)

    OJ C, C/2024/2572, 22.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2572/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2572/oj

    European flag

    Official Journal
    of the European Union

    EN

    C series


    C/2024/2572

    22.4.2024

    Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 February 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo – Bulgaria) – V.B. Trade OOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ – Veliko Tarnovo

    (Case C-466/22,  (1) V.B. Trade)

    (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Internal market - Electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions - Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 - Article 25 - Electronic signatures - Legal effect and evidential value in legal proceedings - Concept of ‘qualified electronic signature’)

    (C/2024/2572)

    Language of the case: Bulgarian

    Referring court

    Administrativen sad Veliko Tarnovo

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: V.B. Trade OOD

    Defendant: Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ Veliko Tarnovo

    Operative part of the judgment

    Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 2014 on electronic identification and trust services for electronic transactions in the internal market and repealing Directive 1999/93/EC, must be interpreted as meaning that the courts of the Member States are required, where the requirements of point 12 of Article 3 of that regulation are met, to recognise the evidential value of the qualified electronic signature as equivalent to that of the handwritten signature to the extent that the relevant national legal regime provides for that handwritten signature.


    (1)   OJ C 389, 10.10.2022.


    ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2572/oj

    ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)


    Top