CELEX: 62015CN0215
Language: en
Date: 2015-05-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-215/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 11 May 2015 — Vasilka Ivanova Gogova v Iliya Dimitrov Iliev

20.7.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 236/29
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Varhoven kasatsionen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 11 May 2015 — Vasilka Ivanova Gogova v Iliya Dimitrov Iliev
   (Case C-215/15)
   (2015/C 236/39)
   Language of the case: Bulgarian
   
      Referring court
   
   Varhoven kasatsionen sad
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellant in cassation: Vasilka Ivanova Gogova
   
      Respondent in the appeal in cassation: Iliya Dimitrov Iliev
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Does the possibility, provided for by law, for civil courts to resolve a dispute between parents concerning their child’s ability to travel abroad and the issue of identity documents, where the applicable substantive law requires that those parental rights be exercised jointly with regard to the child, constitute a matter relating to ‘the attribution, exercise, delegation, restriction or termination of parental responsibility’ within the meaning of Article 1(1)(b), in conjunction with Article 2(7), of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (1) concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility to which Article 8(1) of that regulation applies?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Do grounds establishing international jurisdiction apply in civil cases concerning parental responsibility where the decision replaces a legal act central to an administrative procedure concerning the child and the applicable law provides that this procedure must take place in a specific EU Member State?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Must it be assumed that there is a prorogation of jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 12(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 where the respondent’s representative has not challenged the jurisdiction of the court but where that representative has not been authorised by the respondent but rather appointed by the court owing to the difficulty in notifying the respondent in order that he might participate in the proceedings in person or through a representative instructed by him?
            
         
      (1)  OJ 2003 L 338, p. 1.