This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62011CN0170
Case C-170/11: 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: 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: 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
SL C 179, 18.6.2011, p. 12–12
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
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).