Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 5 December 2013

Walter Vapenik v Josef Thurner

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg

Area of freedom, security and justice — Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 — European enforcement order for uncontested claims — Requirements for certification as an enforcement order — Situation in which the judgment was given in the Member State of the creditor in a dispute between two persons not engaged in commercial or professional activities

Case C‑508/12


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex
Judgment (OJ)
31/01/2014 Vapenik
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2013:790
05/12/2013 Vapenik
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2013:790
05/12/2013 Vapenik
Application (OJ)
01/02/2013 Vapenik
View pdf documents
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Landesgericht Salzburg – Interpretation of Article 6(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims (OJ 2004 L 143, p. 15) – Conditions for certification as an enforcement order in a decision relating to an uncontested claim – Situation in which the decision has been delivered in the creditor’s Member State in a dispute between two consumers

Systematic classification scheme

1.
4 Internal policy of the European Union
  4.06 Area of freedom, security and justice
    4.06.02 Judicial cooperation in civil matters
      4.06.02.02 European Enforcement Order


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

  • Directive 93/13 : paragraph 26
  • Regulation 44/2001 : paragraphs 25, 27, 35 - 37
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A15P1 : paragraphs 9, 28
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A16P1 : paragraphs 10, 34
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A16P2 : paragraphs 10, 34
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A35P1 : paragraph 10
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A43P1 : paragraph 13
  • Regulation 44/2001 -A45P1 : paragraph 14
  • Regulation 44/2001 -C13 : paragraphs 8, 27
  • Regulation 44/2001 -CH2 : paragraph 12
  • Regulation 805/2004 : paragraphs 24, 25, 35 - 37
  • Regulation 805/2004 -A01 : paragraph 4
  • Regulation 805/2004 -A03P1 : paragraph 5
  • Regulation 805/2004 -A6P1 : paragraph 6
  • Regulation 805/2004 -A6P1LD : paragraphs 1, 21 - 24, 38, 39
  • Regulation 805/2004 -C8 : paragraph 3
  • Regulation 805/2004 -C9 : paragraph 3
  • Regulation 805/2004 -C20 : paragraph 3
  • Regulation 805/2004 -CH3 : paragraph 7
  • Regulation 593/2008 -A06P1 : paragraphs 16, 29
  • Regulation 593/2008 -C23 : paragraphs 15, 29
  • Regulation 593/2008 -C24 : paragraphs 15, 29
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -89/91 : paragraph 32
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -618/10 : paragraph 26
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -92/11 : paragraph 26
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -419/11 : paragraph 28
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -488/11 : paragraph 26
  • Court of Justice - Judgment C -320/12 : paragraph 23

Operative part

  • Interprets : Regulation 805/2004 -A06P1LD

Opinion

Information not available


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 09/11/2012

Date of the Opinion

Information not available

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

05/12/2013


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 46 from 16.02.2013, p.12

Judgment: OJ C 45 from 15.02.2014, p.14

Name of the parties

Vapenik

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Idot, Laurence: Notion de consommateur et application des règles protectrices, Europe 2014 Février Com. nº 2 p.51-52 (FR)
  2. Mankowski, Peter: Europäischer Vollstreckungstitel für unbestrittene Forderung aus Verbrauchervertrag („Vapenik“), Entscheidungen zum Wirtschaftsrecht 2014 p.371-372 (DE)
  3. Strikwerda, L.: Verzoek om een prejduciële beslising krachtens art. 267 VWEU, ingediend door het Landesgericht Salzburg (Oostenrijk) bij beslissing van 31 oktober 2012., Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2014 nº 261-269 p.3303-3304 (NL)
  4. Knetsch, Jonas: Inapplicabilité du titre exécutoire européen aux litiges entre consommateurs, Revue critique de droit international privé 2014 nº 2 p.651-660 (FR)
  5. Gielen, Patrick: Arrêt Vapenik : la Cour de justice définit le champ d'application du titre exécutoire européen, European Journal of Consumer Law 2014 p.207-210 (FR)
  6. Apers, Elsemiek: Droit de la consommation 2014 p.50-56 (NL)
  7. Stadler, Astrid: Die Einheitlichkeit des Verbrauchervertragsbegriffs im Europäischen Zivil- und Zivilverfahrensrecht – Zu den Grenzen rechtsaktübergreifender Auslegung, Praxis des internationalen Privat- und Verfahrensrechts 2015 p.203-207 (DE)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Landesgericht Salzburg - Austria

Subject-matter

  • area of freedom, security and justice
  • - Judicial cooperation in civil matters

Provisions of national law referred to

AT - Exekutionsordnung, Paragraph 7a

Gesetz vom 27. Mai 1896, über das Exekutions- und Sicherungsverfahren (Exekutionsordnung – EO)., Paragraph 7a

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

neuvième chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Safjan

Advocate General

Cruz Villalón

Language(s) of the Case

  • German

Language(s) of the Opinion

    Information not available