Case C‑300/14

Imtech Marine Belgium NV

v

Radio Hellenic SA

(Request for a preliminary ruling
from the hof van beroep te Antwerpen)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 805/2004 — European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims — Conditions for certification — Rights of the debtor — Review of the judgment)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber), 17 December 2015

1.        Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Creation of a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims — Regulation No 805/2004 — Certification of a judgment as a European Enforcement Order — Review of the judgment in exceptional cases — No obligation to establish in national law a review procedure such as that referred to in Article 19 of that regulation — Consequences of the absence of such a procedure in national law — Not possible to certify judgments under the conditions referred to in that review procedure

(Art. 288 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 805/2004, Art. 19)

2.        Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Creation of a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims — Regulation No 805/2004 — Certification of a judgment as a European Enforcement Order — Review of the judgment in exceptional cases — Conditions for certifying a judgment delivered in absentia — Possibility of a full review, in law and in fact, of that judgment under national law — Possibility of the periods for challenging a judgment on an uncontested claim being extended where certain extraordinary circumstances arise

(Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47(2); European Parliament and Council Regulation No 805/2004, Art. 19(1))

3.        Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Creation of a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims — Regulation No 805/2004 — Certification of a judgment as a European Enforcement Order — Certification that may be applied for at any time — Certification may only be carried out by a national judge — Act of issuing the certificate may be left to the registrar

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 805/2004, Art. 6)

1.        Article 19 of Regulation No 805/2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims, read in the light of Article 288 TFEU, must be interpreted as not requiring Member States to establish in their national law a review procedure such as that referred to in Article 19 of that regulation.

According to recital 19 of Regulation No 805/2004, that regulation does not imply an obligation for the Member States to adapt their national legislation to the minimum procedural standards set out therein, or, therefore, to establish a specific review procedure within the meaning of Article 19. The only consequence of the lack of a review procedure is that a judgment cannot be certified as a European Enforcement Order under the conditions referred to in that article. In those circumstances, a Member State which, in accordance with the wording of that regulation, chooses not to adapt its legislation cannot be in breach of Article 288 TFEU.

(see paras 28-31, operative part 1)

2.        In order to respect the debtor’s rights of defence and the right to a fair trial guaranteed by the second paragraph of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 19(1) of Regulation No 805/2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to certify a judgment delivered in absentia as a European Enforcement Order, the court ruling on such an application must satisfy itself that its national law effectively and without exception allows for a full review, in law and in fact, of such a judgment in the two situations referred to in that provision and that it allows the periods for challenging a judgment on an uncontested claim to be extended, not only in the event of force majeure, but also where other extraordinary circumstances beyond the debtor’s control prevented him from contesting the claim in question.

(see paras 38, 42, operative part 2)

3.        Article 6 of Regulation No 805/2004 creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims must be interpreted as meaning that the certification of a judgment as a European Enforcement Order, which may be applied for at any time, can be carried out only by a judge.

The legal qualifications of a judge are essential to the correct assessment — in a context of uncertainty as to the observance of the minimum requirements intended to safeguard the debtor’s rights of defence and the right to a fair trial — of the remedies under national law. However, the formal act of issuing the certificate is not necessarily an act that has to be carried out by the judge, and may therefore be left to the registrar.

As to whether the certification of a judgment as a European Enforcement Order must be requested in the document initiating proceedings, Article 6 of Regulation No 805/2004 provides that a judgment on an uncontested claim delivered in a Member State is, upon application at any time to the court of origin, to be certified as a European Enforcement Order. In addition, it would not make sense to require that the application for certification must be made in all cases in the document initiating proceedings, since it is not yet known at that stage whether or not the claim will be contested and, accordingly, whether the judgment to be given at the end of those proceedings will satisfy the requirements for certification as a European Enforcement Order.

(see paras 45, 47-50, operative part 3)