CELEX: 62014CA0521
Language: en
Date: 2016-01-21 00:00:00
Title: Case C-521/14: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — SOVAG — Schwarzmeer und Ostsee Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft v If Vahinkovakuutusyhtiö Oy (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 — Article 6(2) — Jurisdiction — Action on a warranty or guarantee or other third party proceedings brought by a third party against a party to judicial proceedings before the court seised of the original proceedings)

14.3.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 98/14
            
         Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 21 January 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus — Finland) — SOVAG — Schwarzmeer und Ostsee Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft v If Vahinkovakuutusyhtiö Oy
   (Case C-521/14) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 - Article 6(2) - Jurisdiction - Action on a warranty or guarantee or other third party proceedings brought by a third party against a party to judicial proceedings before the court seised of the original proceedings))
   (2016/C 098/17)
   Language of the case: Finnish
   
      Referring court
   
   Korkein oikeus
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: SOVAG — Schwarzmeer und Ostsee Versicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft
   
      Defendant: If Vahinkovakuutusyhtiö Oy
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted to the effect that its scope includes an action brought by a third party, in accordance with national law, against the defendant in the original proceedings, and closely linked to those original proceedings, seeking reimbursement of compensation paid by that third party to the applicant in those original proceedings, provided that the action was not instituted solely with the object of removing that defendant from the jurisdiction of the court which would be competent in the case.
   
      (1)  OJ C 34, 2.2.2015.