This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62010CN0514
Case C-514/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 2 November 2010 — Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH v Sewar spol. s r. o.
Case C-514/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 2 November 2010 — Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH v Sewar spol. s r. o.
Case C-514/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 2 November 2010 — Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH v Sewar spol. s r. o.
IO C 13, 15.1.2011, p. 20–20
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
15.1.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 13/20 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší soud České republiky (Czech Republic) lodged on 2 November 2010 — Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH v Sewar spol. s r. o.
(Case C-514/10)
()
2011/C 13/37
Language of the case: Czech
Referring court
Nejvyšší soud České republiky
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: Wolf Naturprodukte GmbH
Respondent: Sewar spol. s r. o.
Question referred
Must Article 66(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (‘the Brussels I Regulation’) be interpreted as meaning that for that regulation to take effect it is necessary that at the time of delivery of a judgment the regulation was in force both in the State whose court delivered the judgment and in the State in which a party seeks to have that judgment recognised and enforced?