CELEX: 62012CN0441
Language: en
Date: 2012-10-03 00:00:00
Title: Case C-441/12: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands), lodged on 3 October 2012 — Almer Beheer BV and Another v Van den Dungen Vastgoed BV and Another

12.1.2013   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 9/29
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands), lodged on 3 October 2012 — Almer Beheer BV and Another v Van den Dungen Vastgoed BV and Another
   (Case C-441/12)
   2013/C 9/48
   Language of the case: Dutch
   
      Referring court
   
   Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Appellants: Almer Beheer BV, Daedalus Holding BV
   
      Respondents: Van den Dungen Vastgoed BV, Oosterhout II BVBA
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Must Article 3(1) of the Prospectus Directive (1) be interpreted as meaning that the obligation to publish a prospectus laid down therein is also applicable in principle (that is to say, apart from the exemptions and exceptions for certain cases referred to in that directive) to an enforced sale of securities?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               
                           (a)
                        
                        
                           If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, should the concept of ‘the total consideration of the offer’ used in Article 1(2)(h) of the Prospectus Directive then be interpreted as meaning that the sums deriving from an enforced sale of securities must be those reasonably to be expected, with due regard for the particular nature of an enforced sale, even if the sums reasonably to be expected are well below the real economic value?
                        
                     
                           (b)
                        
                        
                           If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, but the answer to Question 2(a) is in the negative, how should ‘the total consideration of the offer’ referred to in Article 1(2)(h) of the Prospectus Directive be construed, particularly in the case of an enforced sale of securities?
                        
                     
         
      (1)  Directive 2003/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading and amending Directive 2001/34/EC (OJ 2003 L 345, p. 64).