# C_2007056EN.01002202.xml

| 10.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 56/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 56/22

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 22 January 2007 — Ingenieurbüro Michael Weiss und Partner GbR v Industrie und Handelskammer Berlin, intervener: Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners Ltd

(Case C-14/07)

(2007/C 56/41)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant on a point of law: Ingenieurbüro Michael Weiss und Partner GbR

Appellant on a point of law:

Respondent to the appeal on a point of law: Industrie und Handelskammer Berlin

Respondent to the appeal on a point of law:

Intervener: Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners Ltd.

Intervener:

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 (1) of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (‘the Regulation’) be interpreted as meaning that an addressee does not have the right to refuse to accept a document pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Regulation if only the annexes to a document to be served are not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 8(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 (1) of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (‘the Regulation’) be interpreted as meaning that an addressee does not have the right to refuse to accept a document pursuant to Article 8(1) of the Regulation if only the annexes to a document to be served are not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the negative:
  Must Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation be interpreted as meaning that the addressee ‘understands’ the language of a Member State of transmission within the meaning of that regulation because, in the exercise of his business activity, he agreed in a contract with the applicant that correspondence was to be conducted in the language of the Member State of transmission? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the negative:

Must Article 8(1)(b) of the Regulation be interpreted as meaning that the addressee ‘understands’ the language of a Member State of transmission within the meaning of that regulation because, in the exercise of his business activity, he agreed in a contract with the applicant that correspondence was to be conducted in the language of the Member State of transmission?

| 3. | If the answer to the second question is in the negative:
  Must Article 8(1) of the Regulation be interpreted as meaning that the addressee may not in any event rely on that provision in order to refuse acceptance of such annexes to a document, which are not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands, if the addressee concludes a contract in the exercise of his business activity in which he agrees that correspondence is to be conducted in the language of the Member State of transmission and the annexes transmitted concern that correspondence and are written in the agreed language? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the answer to the second question is in the negative:

Must Article 8(1) of the Regulation be interpreted as meaning that the addressee may not in any event rely on that provision in order to refuse acceptance of such annexes to a document, which are not in the language of the Member State addressed or in a language of the Member State of transmission which the addressee understands, if the addressee concludes a contract in the exercise of his business activity in which he agrees that correspondence is to be conducted in the language of the Member State of transmission and the annexes transmitted concern that correspondence and are written in the agreed language?

---

(1)  OJ L 160, 2000, p. 37.

1

---