# C_2020036EN.01001001.xml

| 3.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 36/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 December 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation — France) — UB v VA, Tiger SCI, WZ, acting as UB’s trustee in bankruptcy, Banque patrimoine et immobilier SA

(Case C-493/18) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Insolvency proceedings - Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 - Article 3(1) - Actions which derive directly from insolvency proceedings and which are closely connected with such proceedings - Sale of immovable property and creation of a mortgage - Action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy seeking a declaration that the transactions concerned are ineffective - Article 25(1) - Exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings were opened)

(2020/C 36/12)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: UB

Defendants: VA, Tiger SCI, WZ, acting as UB’s trustee in bankruptcy, Banque patrimoine et immobilier SA

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that an action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy appointed by a court of the Member State within the territory of which the insolvency proceedings were opened seeking a declaration that the sale of immovable property situated in another Member State and the mortgage granted over it are ineffective as against the general body of creditors falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the first Member State. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings must be interpreted as meaning that an action brought by the trustee in bankruptcy appointed by a court of the Member State within the territory of which the insolvency proceedings were opened seeking a declaration that the sale of immovable property situated in another Member State and the mortgage granted over it are ineffective as against the general body of creditors falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the first Member State.

| 2. | Article 25(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that a judgment by which a court of the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings were opened authorises the trustee in bankruptcy to bring an action in another Member State, even if that action falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of that court, cannot have the effect of conferring international jurisdiction on the courts of that other Member State. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Article 25(1) of Regulation No 1346/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that a judgment by which a court of the Member State in which the insolvency proceedings were opened authorises the trustee in bankruptcy to bring an action in another Member State, even if that action falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of that court, cannot have the effect of conferring international jurisdiction on the courts of that other Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 364, 8.10.2018.

---