# C_2023223EN.01001401.xml

| 26.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Śródmieścia w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 22 March 2023 — Credit Agricole Bank Polska SA v AB

(Case C-183/23, Credit Agricole Bank Polska)

(2023/C 223/18)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Rejonowy dla Warszawy-Śródmieścia w Warszawie

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Credit Agricole Bank Polska SA

Defendant: AB

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the provisions of that regulation apply to the determination of jurisdiction in a case against a consumer in absentia who is not a national of any Member State and regarding whom, first, it is known that his or her last known place of residence was in a Member State and, second, there is credible evidence that he or she is no longer domiciled in the territory of that Member State, where there is no credible evidence suggesting that he or she has left the territory of the European Union to return to the State of which he or she is a national? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (recast) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the provisions of that regulation apply to the determination of jurisdiction in a case against a consumer in absentia who is not a national of any Member State and regarding whom, first, it is known that his or her last known place of residence was in a Member State and, second, there is credible evidence that he or she is no longer domiciled in the territory of that Member State, where there is no credible evidence suggesting that he or she has left the territory of the European Union to return to the State of which he or she is a national?

| 2. | Is Article 26(1) and (2) of [Regulation No 1215/2012] to be interpreted as meaning that an appearance entered by a representative appointed in accordance with the national law of a Member State to represent that consumer in absentia replaces the appearance of the consumer and permits the assumption that a court of that Member State has jurisdiction despite the existence of credible evidence that the consumer is no longer domiciled in the territory of the Member State concerned? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 26(1) and (2) of [Regulation No 1215/2012] to be interpreted as meaning that an appearance entered by a representative appointed in accordance with the national law of a Member State to represent that consumer in absentia replaces the appearance of the consumer and permits the assumption that a court of that Member State has jurisdiction despite the existence of credible evidence that the consumer is no longer domiciled in the territory of the Member State concerned?

---

(1)  OJ 2012 L 351, p. 1.

---