Language of document :

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 September 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas — Lithuania) — Nickel & Goeldner Spedition GmbH v Kintra UAB

(Case C-157/13) 1

(Request for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 — Article 3(1) — Concept of an ‘action related to insolvency proceedings and closely connected with those proceedings’ —Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 1(2)(b) — Concept of ‘bankruptcy’ — Action for payment of a debt brought by the insolvency administrator — Debt arising out of the international carriage of goods — Relationship between Regulations No 1346/2000 and No 44/2001 and the Convention for the International Carriage of Goods by Road (CMR))

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Lietuvos Aukščiausiasis Teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Nickel & Goeldner Spedition GmbH

Defendant: Kintra UAB

Operative part of the judgment

1.    Article 1(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that an action for the payment of a debt based on the provision of carriage services taken by the insolvency administrator of an insolvent undertaking in the course of insolvency proceedings opened in one Member State and taken against a service recipient established in another Member State comes under the concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ within the meaning of that provision.

2.    Article 71 of Regulation No 44/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation where a dispute falls within the scope of both that regulation and the Convention on the Contract for the International Carriage of Goods by Road, signed in Geneva on 19 May 1956, as amended by the Protocol signed in Geneva on 5 July 1978, a Member State may, in accordance with Article 71(1) of that regulation, apply the rules concerning jurisdiction laid down in Article 31(1) of that convention.


1 OJ C 156, 1.6.2013.