# C_2023164EN.01002202.xml

| 8.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/22

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2023 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 11 de Barcelona — Spain) — QJ and IP v Deutsche Bank AG

(Joined Cases C-198/22 and C-199/22) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Article 101 TFEU - Directive 2014/104/EU - Article 10 - Scope ratione temporis - Actions for damages for infringements of EU competition law provisions - Limitation period - Infringement committed before the entry into force of the directive - Consumer protection)

(2023/C 164/28)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 11 de Barcelona

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: QJ (C-198/22)

Applicant: IP (C-199/22)

Defendant: Deutsche Bank AG

Operative part of the order

| 1. | Article 101 TFEU and the principle of effectiveness must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, as interpreted by the national court, according to which the limitation period for bringing an action for damages for an infringement of EU competition law provisions by a consumer begins to run on the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of the summary of the European Commission’s final decision by which that infringement has been found, since the elements necessary to enable the injured party to bring an action for damages on the date of that publication can reasonably be considered to have been known to him or her. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 101 TFEU and the principle of effectiveness must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, as interpreted by the national court, according to which the limitation period for bringing an action for damages for an infringement of EU competition law provisions by a consumer begins to run on the date of publication in the Official Journal of the European Union of the summary of the European Commission’s final decision by which that infringement has been found, since the elements necessary to enable the injured party to bring an action for damages on the date of that publication can reasonably be considered to have been known to him or her.

| 2. | Article 10(3) of Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (2) must be interpreted as meaning that an action for damages for an infringement of competition law that, although relating to an infringement that ceased before the entry into force of that directive, was brought after the entry into force of the provisions transposing it into national law falls within its temporal scope, in so far as the limitation period applicable to that action did not expire before the time limit for transposition of that directive. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 10(3) of Directive 2014/104/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 November 2014 on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of the competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (2) must be interpreted as meaning that an action for damages for an infringement of competition law that, although relating to an infringement that ceased before the entry into force of that directive, was brought after the entry into force of the provisions transposing it into national law falls within its temporal scope, in so far as the limitation period applicable to that action did not expire before the time limit for transposition of that directive.

---

(1)  Dates lodged: 14.3.2022.

(2)  OJ 2014 L 349, p. 1.

---