View of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2014:2484
Date: 2014-12-16
Language of the case: French
Subject matter: Area of freedom, security and justice;Judicial cooperation in civil matters
Procedure: Preliminary reference - urgent procedure
Origin: Belgium

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Belgium) lodged on 10 November 2014 — RG v SF (Case C-498/14) Language of the case: French Referring court Cour d’appel de Bruxelles Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: RG Defendant: SF Question referred Are the provisions in Article 11(7) and (8) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 1 (‘the Brussels IIa Regulation’) to be interpreted as precluding a Member State from: giving preference to the specialisation of courts in situations of parental child abduction with respect to the procedure provided for in those [provisions] even where a court or tribunal has already been seised of proceedings concerning the substance of parental responsibility in relation to the child? removing, from the court seised of proceedings on the substance of parental responsibility in relation to the child, jurisdiction to give judgment on the custody of the child, even though that court has jurisdiction, under international and national law, to give judgment on questions of parental responsibility in relation to the child? ____________ 1 OJ 2000 L 338, p. 1.