Case C‑223/14

Tecom Mican SL

and

José Arias Domínguez

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de Primera Instancia No 7 de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ — Private documents — Cross-border implications — Functioning of the internal market’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 11 November 2015

Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Regulation No 1393/2007 — Extrajudicial document — Conditions for the application of Article 16 of the Regulation satisfied — No obligation to ascertain, on a case-by-case basis, the cross-border implications of the service of an extrajudicial document and its necessity for the proper functioning of the internal market

Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Regulation No 1393/2007 — Service of an extrajudicial document pursuant to the detailed rules laid down by that regulation following earlier service of that document — Lawfulness

Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents — Regulation No 1393/2007 — Extrajudicial document — Meaning — Private documents requiring formal transmission to an addressee residing abroad for the purposes of exercising, proving or safeguarding a right or a claim in civil or commercial law — Included

See the text of the decision. (see para. 32)

Article 16 of Regulation No 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters, and repealing Regulation No 1348/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’ referred to in that article encompasses not only documents drawn up or certified by a public authority or official but also private documents of which the formal transmission to an addressee residing abroad is necessary for the purposes of exercising, proving or safeguarding a right or a claim in civil or commercial law. Since the actual wording of Article 16 of Regulation No 1393/2007 does not specify its scope, regard must be had to the context of Article 16 of the regulation, the objectives pursued by the regulation and, where relevant, the preparatory work leading to its adoption. As regards its context, Regulation No 1393/2007, which was adopted on the basis of Article 61(c) EC, lays down, as is stated in recital 1 thereof, a system for intra-Community service of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters in order to establish progressively an area of freedom, security and justice. With this in mind, according to recital 2 of Regulation No 1393/2007, that regulation aims to improve and expedite the transmission of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters for service between the Member States, in order to reinforce the proper functioning of the internal market. Thus, having regard to the preparatory work leading to the adoption of Regulation No 1393/2007, and, in particular, in the context of developments in the field of judicial cooperation in civil matters of which it forms part, the concept of an ‘extrajudicial document’, within the meaning of Article 16 of the regulation, must be interpreted as encompassing both documents drawn up or certified by a public authority or official and private documents of which the formal transmission to an addressee residing abroad is necessary for the purposes of exercising, proving or safeguarding a right or a claim in civil or commercial law. The cross-border transmission of such private documents by means of the system of service laid down in Regulation No 1393/2007 also contributes to reinforcing, in the field of cooperation in civil or commercial matters, the proper functioning of the internal market and in establishing progressively an area of freedom, security and justice in the European Union. (see paras 35-38, 44-46, operative part 1)

Regulation No 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters, and repealing Regulation No 1348/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that service of an extrajudicial document, pursuant to the detailed rules laid down by that regulation, can be effected even where the applicant has already effected an earlier service of that document through a means of transmission not provided for in the regulation, or through another of the means of transmission put in place by it. With regard, first, to the case in which an applicant has effected an earlier service under detailed rules not provided for in Regulation No 1393/2007, that regulation provides for only two situations in which the service of a document between Member States falls outside its scope and cannot be carried out by the means put in place by it, namely, first, where the permanent or habitual residence of the addressee is unknown and, second, where that person has appointed an authorised representative in the Member State where the judicial proceedings are taking place. Thus, the regulation does not provide for any other exception to the use of the means laid down for the transmission of an extrajudicial document between Member States in the case where an applicant has already effected an initial service of the same document through a means of transmission other than that laid down by the regulation. In the second place, as regards the consequences related to the case in which an applicant effects an earlier service pursuant to the detailed rules laid down by Regulation No 1393/2007, by virtue of Article 16 thereof, the regulation lays down exhaustively various means of transmission applicable to the service of extrajudicial documents. The regulation has not, however, established a hierarchy between the various means of transmission that it put in place. Furthermore, in order to ensure an expedient cross-border transmission of the relevant documents, the regulation neither entrusts the transmitting or receiving agencies, nor the diplomatic or consular agents, the judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the Member State addressed with the task of determining whether the reasons for which an applicant may wish to effect service of a document through the means of transmission laid down are appropriate or relevant. It follows that, as regards the service of extrajudicial documents, an applicant is perfectly entitled not only to choose any of the means of transmission laid down by Regulation No 1393/2007, but also to resort, simultaneously or successively, to two or more of the methods of service which he deems the most suitable or appropriate in the light of the circumstances of the case. (see paras 49, 51, 52, 54, 57-59, 61, operative part 2)