# C_2018190EN.01001102.xml

| 4.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Högsta domstolen (Sweden) lodged on 20 March 2018 — CeDe Group AB v KAN Sp. z o.o. in bankruptcy

(Case C-198/18)

(2018/C 190/15)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Referring court

Högsta domstolen

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: CeDe Group AB

Applicant:

Defendant: KAN Sp. z o.o. in bankruptcy

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 4 of Regulation No 1346/2000 (1) be interpreted as meaning that it applies to an action which is brought before a Swedish court by the liquidator of a Polish company — which is the subject of insolvency proceedings in Poland — against a Swedish company for payment of goods delivered under an agreement into which the companies entered before that insolvency? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 4 of Regulation No 1346/2000 (1) be interpreted as meaning that it applies to an action which is brought before a Swedish court by the liquidator of a Polish company — which is the subject of insolvency proceedings in Poland — against a Swedish company for payment of goods delivered under an agreement into which the companies entered before that insolvency?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is it of any importance that, during the proceedings before the courts, the liquidator transfers the claim at issue to a company which enters the proceedings in the place of the liquidator? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, is it of any importance that, during the proceedings before the courts, the liquidator transfers the claim at issue to a company which enters the proceedings in the place of the liquidator?

| 3. | If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, is it of any importance if the company which has entered the proceedings thereafter becomes insolvent? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If the answer to the second question is in the affirmative, is it of any importance if the company which has entered the proceedings thereafter becomes insolvent?

| 4. | If the defendant in the proceedings before the courts in the situation set out in the first question claims that the liquidator’s claim for payment should be set off against a counterclaim which arises from the same agreement as the claim, is that set-off situation covered by Article 4(2)(d)? |
| --- | --- |

4.

If the defendant in the proceedings before the courts in the situation set out in the first question claims that the liquidator’s claim for payment should be set off against a counterclaim which arises from the same agreement as the claim, is that set-off situation covered by Article 4(2)(d)?

| 5. | Is the relationship between Article 4(2)(d) and Article 6(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 to be interpreted as meaning that Article 6(1) applies only if it is not possible under the law of the State of the opening of proceedings to apply a set-off, or can Article 6(1) also apply to other situations, for example where there is only a certain difference between the level of possibility of set-off in the legal orders in question or where there are no differences at all but set-off is nonetheless refused in the State of the opening of proceedings? |
| --- | --- |

5.

Is the relationship between Article 4(2)(d) and Article 6(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 to be interpreted as meaning that Article 6(1) applies only if it is not possible under the law of the State of the opening of proceedings to apply a set-off, or can Article 6(1) also apply to other situations, for example where there is only a certain difference between the level of possibility of set-off in the legal orders in question or where there are no differences at all but set-off is nonetheless refused in the State of the opening of proceedings?

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings (OJ 2000 L 160, p. 1).

1

---