# C_2014388EN.01000302.xml

| 3.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 388/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/3

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 11 August 2014 — Alta Realitat S.L. v Erlock Films and Ulrich Thomsen

(Case C-384/14)

2014/C 388/04

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Alta Realitat S.L.

Applicant:

Defendants: Erlock Films and Ulrich Thomsen

Defendants:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1) | Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 (1) be interpreted to the effect that the national court hearing the action may determine, on the basis of all the information in the court-file at its disposal, whether an addressee understands a [particular] language? |
| --- | --- |

1)

Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 (1) be interpreted to the effect that the national court hearing the action may determine, on the basis of all the information in the court-file at its disposal, whether an addressee understands a [particular] language?

1

If Question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative:

| 2) | Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 be interpreted to the effect that, where the national court hearing the action has determined, on the basis of all the information in the court-file at its disposal, that [the] addressee does understand a [particular] language, the person effecting service in such a situation does not have to offer the addressee the option of refusing the document? |
| --- | --- |

2)

Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 be interpreted to the effect that, where the national court hearing the action has determined, on the basis of all the information in the court-file at its disposal, that [the] addressee does understand a [particular] language, the person effecting service in such a situation does not have to offer the addressee the option of refusing the document?

| 3) | Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 be interpreted to the effect that, if the addressee of a notice refuses a document drafted in a certain language, following a declaration from the court hearing the action that that person has a sufficient level of understanding of that language, the refusal of the document is not justified, and the court hearing the action may apply the consequences provided for in the legislation of the State of transmission to this type of unjustified refusal of a document and, if the procedural rules of the State of transmission so provide, treat the document as having been served on the addressee? |
| --- | --- |

3)

Must Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 be interpreted to the effect that, if the addressee of a notice refuses a document drafted in a certain language, following a declaration from the court hearing the action that that person has a sufficient level of understanding of that language, the refusal of the document is not justified, and the court hearing the action may apply the consequences provided for in the legislation of the State of transmission to this type of unjustified refusal of a document and, if the procedural rules of the State of transmission so provide, treat the document as having been served on the addressee?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 November 2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents), and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000. OJ 2007 L 324, p. 79.

1

---