# C_2022222EN.01000802.xml

| 7.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Croatia) lodged on 30 November 2021 — UDRUGA KHL MEDVEŠČAK ZAGREB

(Case C-727/21)

(2022/C 222/13)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: UDRUGA KHL MEDVEŠČAK ZAGREB

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the rule laid down in the second part of the first sentence and in the second sentence of Article 177(3) of the Sudski poslovnik (Rules of Procedure of the Courts, Narodne novine, br. 37/14, 49/14, 8/15, 35/15, 123/15, 45/16, 29/17, 33/17, 34/17, 57/17, 101/18, 119/18, 81/19, 128/19, 39/20 and 47/20), which provides that ‘a case before a court of second instance shall be deemed to be closed on the date on which the decision is sent from the court office, after the case has been returned by the Registration Service. The Registration Service shall be required to return the file to the court office as promptly as possible after receipt thereof. The decision shall then be notified within a further period of eight days’, to be considered compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the rule laid down in the second part of the first sentence and in the second sentence of Article 177(3) of the Sudski poslovnik (Rules of Procedure of the Courts, Narodne novine, br. 37/14, 49/14, 8/15, 35/15, 123/15, 45/16, 29/17, 33/17, 34/17, 57/17, 101/18, 119/18, 81/19, 128/19, 39/20 and 47/20), which provides that ‘a case before a court of second instance shall be deemed to be closed on the date on which the decision is sent from the court office, after the case has been returned by the Registration Service. The Registration Service shall be required to return the file to the court office as promptly as possible after receipt thereof. The decision shall then be notified within a further period of eight days’, to be considered compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

| 2. | Is Article 40(2) of the Zakon o sudovima (Law on judicial bodies), which provides that ‘the legal position adopted at the meeting of all the judges or of a section of the Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske (Supreme Court, Croatia), of the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Commercial Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki upravni sud Republike Hrvatske (Administrative Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki kazneni sud Republike Hrvatske (Criminal Court of Appeal, Croatia), du Visoki prekršajni sud Republike Hrvatske (Higher Misdemeanour Court, Croatia) and of the meeting of a section of a Županijski sud (County Court, Croatia) shall be binding on all the chambers or judges at second instance of that section or court’ compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 40(2) of the Zakon o sudovima (Law on judicial bodies), which provides that ‘the legal position adopted at the meeting of all the judges or of a section of the Vrhovni sud Republike Hrvatske (Supreme Court, Croatia), of the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske (Commercial Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki upravni sud Republike Hrvatske (Administrative Court of Appeal, Croatia), of the Visoki kazneni sud Republike Hrvatske (Criminal Court of Appeal, Croatia), du Visoki prekršajni sud Republike Hrvatske (Higher Misdemeanour Court, Croatia) and of the meeting of a section of a Županijski sud (County Court, Croatia) shall be binding on all the chambers or judges at second instance of that section or court’ compatible with Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

---