# C_2017269EN.01000602.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 24 May 2017 — Helga Löber v Barclays Bank PLC

(Case C-304/17)

(2017/C 269/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Helga Löber

Applicant:

Defendant: Barclays Bank PLC

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Under Article 5(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, (1) in non-contractual claims based on prospectus liability where

1

| — | the investor took his investment decision caused by the defective prospectus at the place where he is domiciled |
| --- | --- |

—

the investor took his investment decision caused by the defective prospectus at the place where he is domiciled

| — | and, on the basis of that decision, he transferred the purchase price for the security acquired on the secondary market from his account held with an Austrian bank to a clearing account held with another Austrian bank, from where the purchase price was subsequently transferred to the seller by order of the applicant, |
| --- | --- |

—

and, on the basis of that decision, he transferred the purchase price for the security acquired on the secondary market from his account held with an Austrian bank to a clearing account held with another Austrian bank, from where the purchase price was subsequently transferred to the seller by order of the applicant,

| (a) | does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the investor is domiciled, |
| --- | --- |

(a)

does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the investor is domiciled,

| (b) | does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the seat/the account-keeping branch of the bank with which the applicant has his bank account from which he transferred the amount invested to the clearing account is located, |
| --- | --- |

(b)

does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the seat/the account-keeping branch of the bank with which the applicant has his bank account from which he transferred the amount invested to the clearing account is located,

| (c) | does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the seat/the account-keeping branch of the bank which keeps the clearing account is located, |
| --- | --- |

(c)

does jurisdiction lie with the court within whose area of jurisdiction the seat/the account-keeping branch of the bank which keeps the clearing account is located,

| (d) | does jurisdiction lie with one of those courts at the choice of the applicant, |
| --- | --- |

(d)

does jurisdiction lie with one of those courts at the choice of the applicant,

| (e) | does jurisdiction lie with none of those courts? |
| --- | --- |

(e)

does jurisdiction lie with none of those courts?

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

1

---