CELEX: 62010CB0194
Language: en
Date: 2011-03-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-194/10: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I, Germany) — Robert Nicolaus Abt and Others v Hypo Real Estate Holding AG (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Relevance of the question — No jurisdiction)

27.8.2011   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 252/8
            
         Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I, Germany) — Robert Nicolaus Abt and Others v Hypo Real Estate Holding AG
   (Case C-194/10) (1)
   
   (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Relevance of the question - No jurisdiction)
   2011/C 252/13
   Language of the case: German
   
      Referring court
   
   Landgericth München I
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicants: Robert Nicolaus Abt, Danieal Kalwarowskyj, Mangusta Beteiligungs GmbH, Karsetn Trippel, VC-Services GmbH, Henning Hahmann
   
      Defendant: Hypo Real Estate Holding AG
   
      Interveners: Klaus E. H. Zapf, Inge Jung-Arend
   
      Re:
   
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Landgericht Munich I — Interpretation of Article 297 EC and of Article 5(1) of Directive 2007/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the exercise of certain rights of shareholders in listed companies (OJ 2007 L 184, p. 17) — Period for convocation of general meeting of a listed company — National legislation, ceasing to have effect on the expiry of the transposition period for the directive, which provides for a shorter convocation period than the minimum period under the directive — Provision likely seriously to compromise the result prescribed by the directive, in the light of the national legislation according to which some decisions of the general meeting remain valid after being registered in the commercial register, even in the event of annulment following legal action
   
      Operative part of the order
   
   
               1.
            
            
               The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to answer the first question referred for a preliminary ruling by the Landgericth München I.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 195, 17.7.2010.