CELEX: C2005/171/03
Language: en
Date: 2005-07-09 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 28 April 2005 in Case C-104/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam St. Paul Dairy Industries NV v Unibel Exser BVBA (Brussels Convention — Provisional, including protective, measures — Hearing of witnesses)

9.7.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/2
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (First Chamber)
   of 28 April 2005
   in Case C-104/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam St. Paul Dairy Industries NV v Unibel Exser BVBA (1)
   
   (Brussels Convention - Provisional, including protective, measures - Hearing of witnesses)
   (2005/C 171/03)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   In Case C-104/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling pursuant to the Protocol of 3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam (Netherlands), made by decision of 12 December 2002, received at the Court on 6 March 2003, in the proceedings between St. Paul Dairy Industries NV and Unibel Exser BVBA — the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, N. Colneric, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, M. Ilešič and E. Levits, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General, M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on 28 April 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:
   Article 24 of the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters, as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, of Ireland and of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, by the Convention of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic, by the Convention of 26 May 1989 on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese Republic and by the Convention of 29 November 1996 on the Accession of the Republic of Austria, the Republic of Finland and the Kingdom of Sweden, must be interpreted as meaning that a measure ordering the hearing of a witness for the purpose of enabling the applicant to decide whether to bring a case, determine whether it would be well founded and assess the relevance of evidence which might be adduced in that regard is not covered by the notion of ‘provisional, including protective, measures’.
   
      (1)  JO C 101, 26.04.2003.