# C_2019263EN.01002501.xml

| 5.8.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.8.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/25

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Trgovački sud u Zagrebu (Croatia) lodged on 28 March 2019 — PARKING d.o.o. v SAWAL d.o.o.

(Case C-267/19)

(2019/C 263/30)

Language of the case: Croatian

Referring court

Trgovački sud u Zagrebu

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: PARKING d.o.o.

Defendant: SAWAL d.o.o.

Questions referred

| 1. | Is a provision of national law, namely Article 1 of the Ovršni zakon (Law on enforcement) (published in the Narodne novine No 112/12, 25/13, 93/14, 55/16 and 73/17), which gives notaries the power to enforce the recovery of debts based on an authentic document by issuing a writ of execution, as an enforcement order, without the express agreement of the debtor who is a legal person established in the Republic of Croatia, compatible with Article 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 18 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in the light of the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Cases C-484/15 and C-551/15? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is a provision of national law, namely Article 1 of the Ovršni zakon (Law on enforcement) (published in the Narodne novine No 112/12, 25/13, 93/14, 55/16 and 73/17), which gives notaries the power to enforce the recovery of debts based on an authentic document by issuing a writ of execution, as an enforcement order, without the express agreement of the debtor who is a legal person established in the Republic of Croatia, compatible with Article 6(1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and Article 18 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in the light of the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Cases C-484/15 and C-551/15?

| 2. | Can the interpretation given in the Court’s judgments of 9 March 2017, Zulfikarpašić (C-484/15, EU:C:2017:199) and Pula Parking (C-551/15, EU:C:2017:193), be applied to Case Povrv-1614/2018, described above, brought before the referring court, and, specifically, is Regulation No 1215/2012 to be interpreted as meaning that, in Croatia, notaries, acting within the framework of the powers conferred on them by national law in enforcement proceedings based on an ‘authentic document’, in which the parties against whom enforcement is sought are legal persons established in other EU Member States, do not fall within the concept of ‘court’ within the meaning of that regulation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Can the interpretation given in the Court’s judgments of 9 March 2017, Zulfikarpašić (C-484/15, EU:C:2017:199) and Pula Parking (C-551/15, EU:C:2017:193), be applied to Case Povrv-1614/2018, described above, brought before the referring court, and, specifically, is Regulation No 1215/2012 to be interpreted as meaning that, in Croatia, notaries, acting within the framework of the powers conferred on them by national law in enforcement proceedings based on an ‘authentic document’, in which the parties against whom enforcement is sought are legal persons established in other EU Member States, do not fall within the concept of ‘court’ within the meaning of that regulation?

---