# C_2011152EN.01001401.xml

| 21.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 152/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 152/14

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy Poznań (Republic of Poland) lodged on 7 March 2011 — Bank Handlowy, Ryszard Adamiak, Christianapol sp. z o. o.

(Case C-116/11)

2011/C 152/24

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy Poznań

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Bank Handlowy, Ryszard Adamiak, Christianapol sp. z o. o.

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 4(1) and (2)(j) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings (1) to be construed as meaning that the term ‘closure of insolvency proceedings’ used in that provision should be interpreted autonomously, independently of the rules applicable in the legal systems of the individual Member States, or is it solely for the national law of the State of the opening of proceedings to decide when closure of insolvency proceedings occurs? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 4(1) and (2)(j) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings (1) to be construed as meaning that the term ‘closure of insolvency proceedings’ used in that provision should be interpreted autonomously, independently of the rules applicable in the legal systems of the individual Member States, or is it solely for the national law of the State of the opening of proceedings to decide when closure of insolvency proceedings occurs?

1

| 2. | Is Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings to be interpreted as meaning that the national court dealing with an application for the opening of secondary insolvency proceedings may never examine the insolvency of a debtor in respect of whom main insolvency proceedings have been opened in another State, or rather that the national court may in certain situations examine the existence of the debtor’s insolvency — particularly where the main proceedings are protective proceedings in which the court has established that the debtor is not insolvent (French sauvegarde proceedings)? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings to be interpreted as meaning that the national court dealing with an application for the opening of secondary insolvency proceedings may never examine the insolvency of a debtor in respect of whom main insolvency proceedings have been opened in another State, or rather that the national court may in certain situations examine the existence of the debtor’s insolvency — particularly where the main proceedings are protective proceedings in which the court has established that the debtor is not insolvent (French sauvegarde proceedings)?

sauvegarde

| 3. | Does interpretation of Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings permit secondary insolvency proceedings, the nature of which is specified in the second sentence of Article 3(3) of the regulation, to be opened in the Member State in which the whole of the assets of the insolvent person are situated, when the main proceedings, which are subject to automatic recognition, are of a protective nature (French sauvegarde proceedings), a scheme of payment has been accepted and confirmed in those proceedings, that scheme is being implemented by the debtor and the court has forbidden the disposal of the debtor’s assets? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does interpretation of Article 27 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings permit secondary insolvency proceedings, the nature of which is specified in the second sentence of Article 3(3) of the regulation, to be opened in the Member State in which the whole of the assets of the insolvent person are situated, when the main proceedings, which are subject to automatic recognition, are of a protective nature (French sauvegarde proceedings), a scheme of payment has been accepted and confirmed in those proceedings, that scheme is being implemented by the debtor and the court has forbidden the disposal of the debtor’s assets?

sauvegarde

---

(1)  OJ L 160, 30.6.2000, p. 1.

1

---