# C_2016016EN.01000902.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/9

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 November 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 7 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria — Spain) — Tecom Mican SL, José Arias Domínguez

(Case C-223/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents - Concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ - Private documents - Cross-border implications - Functioning of the internal market))

(2016/C 016/10)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 7 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Tecom Mican SL, José Arias Domínguez

Applicants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 16 of 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, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ referred to in that article encompasses not only documents drawn up or certified by a public authority or official but also private documents of which the formal transmission to an addressee residing abroad is necessary for the purposes of exercising, proving or safeguarding a right or a claim in civil or commercial law. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 16 of 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, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ referred to in that article encompasses not only documents drawn up or certified by a public authority or official but also private documents of which the formal transmission to an addressee residing abroad is necessary for the purposes of exercising, proving or safeguarding a right or a claim in civil or commercial law.

| 2. | Regulation No 1393/2007 must be interpreted as meaning that service of an extrajudicial document, pursuant to the detailed rules laid down by that regulation, can be effected even where the applicant has already effected an earlier service of that document through a means of transmission not provided for in the regulation, or through another of the means of transmission put in place by it. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Regulation No 1393/2007 must be interpreted as meaning that service of an extrajudicial document, pursuant to the detailed rules laid down by that regulation, can be effected even where the applicant has already effected an earlier service of that document through a means of transmission not provided for in the regulation, or through another of the means of transmission put in place by it.

| 3. | Article 16 of Regulation No 1393/2007 must be interpreted as meaning that, where the conditions of that article are satisfied, it is not necessary to ascertain, on a case-by-case basis, whether the service of an extrajudicial document has cross-border implications and is necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 16 of Regulation No 1393/2007 must be interpreted as meaning that, where the conditions of that article are satisfied, it is not necessary to ascertain, on a case-by-case basis, whether the service of an extrajudicial document has cross-border implications and is necessary for the proper functioning of the internal market.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.

1

---