Case C‑29/16

HanseYachts AG

v

Port D’Hiver Yachting SARL and Others

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Stralsund)

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 27 — Lis pendens — Court first seised — Point 1 of Article 30 — Concept of ‘document instituting the proceedings’ or ‘equivalent document’ — Application for proceedings to preserve or establish, prior to any legal proceedings, evidence of facts on which a subsequent action could be based)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 4 May 2017

1.        Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Lis pendens — Date on which a court is seised — Document equivalent to the document instituting the proceedings — Concept — Document instituting a procedure for a measure of inquiry before any legal proceedings — Precluded

(Council Regulation No 44/2001, Art. 30, point 1)

2.        Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Jurisdiction and the enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters — Regulation No 44/2001 — Lis pendens — Date on which a court is seised — Concept — Date of institution of a procedure for a measure of instruction before any legal proceedings — Precluded

(Council Regulation No 44/2001, Arts 27(1) and 30, point 1)

1.      See the text of the decision.

See para. 35)

2.      Article 27(1) and point 1 of Article 30 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, in cases of lis pendens, that the date on which a procedure for a measure of inquiry prior to any legal proceedings was commenced cannot constitute the date on which, within the meaning of point 1 of Article 30 of that regulation, a court called upon to rule on a substantive application which was brought in the same Member State following the result of that measure was ‘deemed to be seised’.

(see para. 36, operative part 1)