18.6.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/12


Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 7 April 2011 — Maurice Robert Josse Marie Ghislain Lippens and Others v Hendrikus Cornelis Kortekaas and Others, other party: Ageas NV, previously Fortis N.V

(Case C-170/11)

2011/C 179/22

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants:

 

Maurice Robert Josse Marie Ghislain Lippens

 

Gilbert Georges Henri Mittler

 

Jean Paul François Caroline Votron

Defendants:

 

Hendrikus Cornelis Kortekaas

 

Kortekaas Entertainment Marketing B.V.

 

Kortekaas Pensioen B.V.

 

Dirk Robbard De Kat

 

Johannes Hendrikus Visch

 

Euphemia Joanna Bökkerink

 

Laminco Gld N-A

Other party: Ageas NV, previously Fortis N.V

Question referred

Must the EC Evidence Regulation, (1) in particular Article 1(1) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that a judge wishing to hear a witness who resides in another Member State must always, for that form of the taking of evidence, use the methods put in place by the EC Evidence Regulation, or does he have the power to use the methods provided by his own national procedural law such as summoning the witness to appear before him?


(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 174, p.1).