Judgment;Summary — ECLI:EU:C:2019:444
Date: 2019-05-23
Language of the case: Polish
Court formation: First Chamber
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling;Reference for a preliminary ruling - decision unnecessary
Origin: Poland

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Gorzowie Wielkopolskim (Poland) lodged on 24 November 2017 — WB (Case C-658/17) Language of the case: Polish Referring court Sąd Okręgowy w Gorzowie Wielkopolskim Applicant in the main proceedings WB Questions referred 1. Must Article 46(3)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession, 1 in conjunction with Article 39(2) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that the issuing of an attestation concerning a decision in a matter of succession, the model for which is set out in Annex 1 to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1329/2014 of 9 December 2014 establishing the Forms referred to in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, 2 is permissible also in relation to decisions which declare the status of heir but are not enforceable (even in part)? 2. Must Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 be interpreted as meaning that a deed of certification of succession drawn up by a notary in accordance with a non-contentious application by all the parties to the certification proceedings, which produces the legal effects of a final court order declaring succession — such as a deed of certification of succession drawn up by a Polish notary — constitutes a decision within the meaning of that provision? and consequently: must the first sentence of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 be interpreted as meaning that the notary drawing up that kind of deed of certification of succession must be regarded as a court within the meaning of that provision? 3. Must the second sentence of Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 be interpreted as meaning that notification effected by a Member State pursuant to Article 79 of the regulation has informational value and is not a condition for regarding a legal professional with competence in matters of succession who exercises judicial functions as a court within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 3(2) of the regulation, where he satisfies the conditions arising from the latter provision? 4. In the event that the answer to Question 1, 2 or 3 is in the negative: Must Article 3(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 be interpreted as meaning that if a national procedural instrument certifying the status of heir, such as the Polish deed of certification of inheritance, is regarded as a decision within the meaning of Article 3(1)(g) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, it cannot be regarded as an authentic instrument? 5. In the event that the answer to Question 4 is in the affirmative: Must Article 3(1)(i) of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 be interpreted as meaning that a deed of certification of succession drawn up by a notary in accordance with a non-contentious application by all the parties to the certification proceedings — such as a deed of certification of succession drawn up by a Polish notary — constitutes an authentic instrument within the meaning of that provision? ____________ 1 OJ 2012 L 201, p. 107. 2 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1329/2014 of 9 December 2014 establishing the Forms referred to in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession (OJ 2014 L 359, p. 30).