CELEX: C2006/086/15
Language: en
Date: 2006-04-08 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of  9 February 2006  in Case C-473/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie in Plumex v Young Sports NV (Judicial cooperation — Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 — Articles 4 to 11 and 14 — Service of judicial documents — Service through agencies — Service by post — Relationship between the methods of transmission and service — Precedence — Time-limit for an appeal)

8.4.2006   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 86/9
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (Third Chamber)
   of 9 February 2006
   in Case C-473/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie in Plumex v Young Sports NV (1)
   
   (Judicial cooperation - Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 - Articles 4 to 11 and 14 - Service of judicial documents - Service through agencies - Service by post - Relationship between the methods of transmission and service - Precedence - Time-limit for an appeal)
   (2006/C 86/15)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   In Case C-473/04: reference for a preliminary ruling under Articles 68 EC and 234 EC from the Hof van Cassatie (Belgium), made by decision of 22 October 2004, received at the Court on 9 November 2004, in the proceedings between Plumex and Young Sports NV — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, J. Malenovský (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, S. von Bahr and A. Borg Barthet, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 9 February 2006, in which it ruled:
   
               1.
            
            
               Council Regulation (EC) No 1348/2000 of 29 May 2000 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that it does not establish any hierarchy between the method of transmission and service under Articles 4 to 11 thereof and that under Article 14 thereof and, consequently, it is possible to serve a judicial document by one or other or both of those methods.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Regulation No 1348/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that, where transmission and service are effected by both the method under Articles 4 to 11 thereof and the method under Article 14 thereof, in order to determine vis-à-vis the person on whom service is effected the point from which time starts to run for the purposes of a procedural time-limit linked to effecting service, reference must be made to the date of the first service validly effected.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 19, 22.01.2005.