mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Por Acórdão de 14 de outubro de 2016, a cour d’appel de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse, França) confirmou a decisão do conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse no sentido de julgar improcedentes os referidos pedidos de RE.
Em 14 de dezembro de 2016, RE interpôs recurso de cassação do referido acórdão, alegando que a cour d’appel de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse) tinha violado a cláusula 2, n.o 6, do Acordo‑Quadro sobre a Licença Parental.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse, França)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse, França)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse, França)"->"Acórdão 12/09/2013";
  "Acórdão 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "Acórdão 12/09/2013"->"julgar improcedentes os referidos pedidos de RE."[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Tribunal de Recurso de Toulouse, França)"->"Acórdão 14/10/2016";
  "Acórdão 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "Acórdão 14/10/2016"->"confirmou a decisão do conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse no sentido de julgar improcedentes os referidos pedidos de RE. RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Romanian

Prin hotărârea din 14 octombrie 2016, cour d’appel de Toulouse (Curtea de Apel din Toulouse, Franța) a confirmat respingerea acestor cereri formulate de RE în fața conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Tribunalul Muncii din Toulouse).
La 14 decembrie 2016, RE a formulat recurs împotriva hotărârii menționate, susținând că cour d’appel de Toulouse (Curtea de Apel din Toulouse) a încălcat clauza 2 punctul (6) din acordul‑cadru privind concediul pentru creșterea copilului.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Tribunalul Muncii din Toulouse, Franța)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Curtea de Apel din Toulouse, Franța)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Tribunalul Muncii din Toulouse, Franța)"->"hotărârea 12/09/2013";
  "hotărârea 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "hotărârea 12/09/2013"->"a confirmat respingerea acestor cereri"[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Curtea de Apel din Toulouse, Franța)"->"hotărârea 14/10/2016";
  "hotărârea 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "hotărârea 14/10/2016"->"a confirmat respingerea acestor cereri formulate de RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse).
Dňa 14. decembra 2016 podala RE proti uvedenému rozsudku kasačný opravný prostriedok, pričom tvrdila, že Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse) porušil doložku 2 bod 6 rámcovej dohody o rodičovskej dovolenke.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse, Francúzsko)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse, Francúzsko)"->"Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 12/09/2013";
  "Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 12/09/2013"->"potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov"[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko)"->"Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 14/10/2016";
  "Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "Rozsudkom zo 14. októbra 2016 Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Odvolací súd Toulouse, Francúzsko) potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, ktoré podala RE na Conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Pracovný súd Toulouse). 14/10/2016"->"potvrdil zamietnutie uvedených návrhov, RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

S sodbo z dne 14. oktobra 2016 je cour d’appel de Toulouse (pritožbeno sodišče v Toulousu, Francija) potrdilo zavrnitev navedenih zahtevkov, ki jih je RE uveljavljala pri conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (delovno sodišče v Toulousu).
RE je 14. decembra 2016 zoper navedeno sodbo vložila kasacijsko pritožbo, v kateri zatrjuje, da je cour d’appel de Toulouse (pritožbeno sodišče v Toulousu) kršilo klavzulo 2, točka 6, okvirnega sporazuma o starševskem dopustu.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (delovno sodišče v Toulousu, Francija)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (pritožbeno sodišče v Toulousu, Francija)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (delovno sodišče v Toulousu, Francija)"->"sodbo 12/09/2013";
  "sodbo 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "sodbo 12/09/2013"->"zavrnitev navedenih zahtevkov"[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (pritožbeno sodišče v Toulousu, Francija)"->"sodbo 14/10/2016";
  "sodbo 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "sodbo 14/10/2016"->"potrdilo zavrnitev navedenih zahtevkov RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Finnish

Cour d’appel de Toulouse (Toulousen ylioikeus, Ranska) vahvisti 14.10.2016 antamallaan tuomiolla RE:n Toulousen työtuomioistuimessa esittämien näiden kahden vaatimuksen hylkäämisen.
RE teki 14.12.2016 kassaatiovalituksen edellä mainitusta tuomiosta ja väitti, että Toulousen ylioikeus oli rikkonut vanhempainlomaa koskevan puitesopimuksen 2 lausekkeen 6 kohtaa.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Toulousen työtuomioistuimessa, Ranska)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Toulousen ylioikeus, Ranska)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (Toulousen työtuomioistuimessa, Ranska)"->"tuomiolla 12/09/2013";
  "tuomiolla 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "tuomiolla 12/09/2013"->"hylkäämisen näiden kahden vaatimuksen"[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Toulousen ylioikeus, Ranska)"->"tuomiolla 14/10/2016";
  "tuomiolla 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "tuomiolla 14/10/2016"->"vahvisti 14.10.2016 antamallaan tuomiolla RE:n Toulousen työtuomioistuimessa esittämien näiden kahden vaatimuksen hylkäämisen. RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 8 May 2019.
RE v Praxair MRC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France).
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Social policy — Directive 96/34/EC — Framework agreement on parental leave — Clause 2.6 — Worker employed full-time and for indefinite duration on part-time parental leave — Dismissal — Compensation payment for dismissal and redeployment leave allowance — Method of calculation — Article 157 TFEU — Equal pay for male and female workers — Part-time parental leave taken primarily by female workers — Indirect discrimination — Objective factors unrelated to any sex discrimination — None.
Case C-486/18. (2019)
Language: Swedish

Genom dom av den 14 oktober 2016, fastställde cour d’appel de Toulouse (Appellationsdomstolen i Toulouse, Frankrike) avslaget på nämnda yrkanden som RE framställt vid conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (arbetsdomstolen i Toulouse).
Den 14 december 2016 överklagade RE ovannämnda dom och gjorde gällande att cour d’appel de Toulouse (Appellationsdomstolen i Toulouse) hade åsidosatt § 2 punkt 6 i ramavtalet om föräldraledighet.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "RE"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (arbetsdomstolen i Toulouse, Frankrike)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Appellationsdomstolen i Toulouse, Frankrike)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "conseil de prud’hommes de Toulouse (arbetsdomstolen i Toulouse, Frankrike)"->"dom 12/09/2013";
  "dom 12/09/2013"->"RE";
  "dom 12/09/2013"->"avslaget på nämnda yrkanden"[dir=none];
  "cour d’appel de Toulouse (Appellationsdomstolen i Toulouse, Frankrike)"->"dom 14/10/2016";
  "dom 14/10/2016"->"RE";
  "dom 14/10/2016"->"fastställde avslaget på nämnda yrkanden som RE"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: English

ZX purchased a ticket online for a flight operated by Ryanair between Porto (Portugal) and Barcelona (Spain).
By her action brought, before the referring court, under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, the applicant in the main proceedings sought compensation in the amount of EUR 250 in respect of the delay to the flight at issue in the main proceedings.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "The referring court"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
   "ZX"->"Brought an action";
   "Brought an action"->"The referring court";
   "Brought an action"->"Compensation in the amount of EUR 250 in respect of the delay to the flight"[dir=none];
   "Compensation in the amount of EUR 250 in respect of the delay to the flight"->"Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Bulgarian

ZX е закупил самолетен билет онлайн за полет, обслужван от Ryanair между Порто (Португалия) и Барселона (Испания).
С иска си, предявен пред запитващата юрисдикция, на основание член 7 от Регламент № 261/2004, ищецът в главното производство иска да му бъде присъдено обезщетение в размер на 250 EUR, за да се поправят вредите от разглежданото в главното производство закъснение на полета.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "запитващата юрисдикция"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "член 7 от Регламент № 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"С иска си, предявен пред запитващата юрисдикция";
  "С иска си, предявен пред запитващата юрисдикция"->"запитващата юрисдикция";
  "С иска си, предявен пред запитващата юрисдикция"->"обезщетение в размер на 250 EUR, за да се поправят вредите от разглежданото в главното производство закъснение на полета."[dir=none];
  "обезщетение в размер на 250 EUR, за да се поправят вредите от разглежданото в главното производство закъснение на полета."->"член 7 от Регламент № 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Spanish

ZX compró en línea un billete de avión para un vuelo entre Oporto (Portugal) y Barcelona (España) operado por Ryanair.
Mediante demanda interpuesta ante el órgano jurisdiccional remitente y basada en el artículo 7 del Reglamento n.o 261/2004, la parte demandante en el litigio principal reclamó una indemnización de 250 euros en concepto de compensación por el retraso del vuelo de que se trata en el litigio principal.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "el órgano jurisdiccional remitente"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "el artículo 7 del Reglamento n.o 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Mediante demanda interpuesta";
  "Mediante demanda interpuesta"->"el órgano jurisdiccional remitente";
  "Mediante demanda interpuesta"->"una indemnización de 250 euros en concepto de compensación por el retraso del vuelo"[dir=none];
  "una indemnización de 250 euros en concepto de compensación por el retraso del vuelo"->"el artículo 7 del Reglamento n.o 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Czech

ZX zakoupila on-line letenku na let provozovaný společností Ryanair z Porta (Portugalsko) do Barcelony (Španělsko).
Svou žalobou podanou na základě článku 7 nařízení č. 261/2004 k předkládajícímu soudu se žalobkyně v původním řízení domáhá poskytnutí odškodnění ve výši 250 eur jako náhrady za zpoždění letu dotčeného v původním řízení.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "předkládajícímu soudu"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "článku 7 nařízení č. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Svou žalobou podanou";
  "Svou žalobou podanou"->"předkládajícímu soudu";
  "Svou žalobou podanou"->"poskytnutí odškodnění ve výši 250 eur jako náhrady za zpoždění letu"[dir=none];
  "poskytnutí odškodnění ve výši 250 eur jako náhrady za zpoždění letu"->"článku 7 nařízení č. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Danish

ZX købte en flybillet online til en Ryanair-flyvning mellem Porto (Portugal) og Barcelona (Spanien).
Med søgsmålet anlagt for den forelæggende ret har sagsøgeren i hovedsagen på grundlag af artikel 7 i forordning nr. 261/2004 nedlagt påstand om tildeling af en kompensation på 250 EUR som godtgørelse for den i hovedsagen omhandlede flyvnings forsinkelse.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "den forelæggende ret"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 7 i forordning nr. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Med søgsmålet anlagt";
  "Med søgsmålet anlagt"->"den forelæggende ret";
  "Med søgsmålet anlagt"->"tildeling af en kompensation på 250 EUR som godtgørelse for den i hovedsagen omhandlede flyvnings forsinkelse."[dir=none];
  "tildeling af en kompensation på 250 EUR som godtgørelse for den i hovedsagen omhandlede flyvnings forsinkelse."->"artikel 7 i forordning nr. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: German

ZX kaufte online ein Flugticket für einen von Ryanair durchgeführten Flug von Porto (Portugal) nach Barcelona (Spanien).
Mit ihrer bei dem vorlegenden Gericht auf der Grundlage von Art. 7 der Verordnung Nr. 261/2004 erhobenen Klage beantragte die Klägerin des Ausgangsverfahrens die Gewährung einer Ausgleichszahlung in Höhe von 250 Euro als Entschädigung für die Verspätung des im Ausgangsverfahren in Rede stehenden Fluges.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "das vorlegende Gericht"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Art. 7 der Verordnung Nr. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"erhobenen Klage";
  "erhobenen Klage"->"das vorlegende Gericht";
  "erhobenen Klage"->"eine Ausgleichszahlung in Höhe von 250 Euro als Entschädigung für die Verspätung des im Ausgangsverfahren in Rede stehenden Fluges."[dir=none];
  "eine Ausgleichszahlung in Höhe von 250 Euro als Entschädigung für die Verspätung des im Ausgangsverfahren in Rede stehenden Fluges."->"Art. 7 der Verordnung Nr. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Estonian

ZX ostis veebis lennupileti lennule Porto (Portugal) – Barcelona (Hispaania), mida viis läbi Ryanair.
Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohtule määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7 alusel esitatud hagis palus põhikohtuasja hageja mõista talle välja 250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohus"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohtule määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7 alusel esitatud hagis palus põhikohtuasja hageja mõista talle välja 250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest.";
  "Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohtule määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7 alusel esitatud hagis palus põhikohtuasja hageja mõista talle välja 250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest."->"Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohus";
  "Eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohtule määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7 alusel esitatud hagis palus põhikohtuasja hageja mõista talle välja 250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest."->"250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest."[dir=none];
  "250 euro suurune hüvitis põhikohtuasjas kõne all oleva lennu hilinemise eest."->"määruse nr 261/2004 artikli 7"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Greek

Η ZX αγόρασε μέσω διαδικτύου αεροπορικό εισιτήριο για πτήση που εκτελεί η Ryanair από το Πόρτο (Πορτογαλία) στη Βαρκελώνη (Ισπανία).
Με την αγωγή που άσκησε ενώπιον του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου δυνάμει του άρθρου 7 του κανονισμού 261/2004, η ενάγουσα της κύριας δίκης ζήτησε να της καταβληθεί αποζημίωση ύψους 250 ευρώ λόγω της καθυστερήσεως της επίμαχης στην υπόθεση της κύριας δίκης πτήσεως.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "άρθρου 7 του κανονισμού 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"άσκησε ενώπιον του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου";
  "άσκησε ενώπιον του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου"->"του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου";
  "άσκησε ενώπιον του αιτούντος δικαστηρίου"->"αποζημίωση ύψους 250 ευρώ λόγω της καθυστερήσεως της επίμαχης στην υπόθεση της κύριας δίκης πτήσεως"[dir=none];
  "αποζημίωση ύψους 250 ευρώ λόγω της καθυστερήσεως της επίμαχης στην υπόθεση της κύριας δίκης πτήσεως"->"άρθρου 7 του κανονισμού 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: French

ZX a acheté en ligne un billet d’avion pour un vol opéré par Ryanair entre Porto (Portugal) et Barcelone (Espagne).
Par son action introduite, devant la juridiction de renvoi, sur le fondement de l’article 7 du règlement no 261/2004, la partie requérante au principal a demandé l’allocation d’une indemnité s’élevant à 250 euros, en réparation du retard du vol en cause au principal.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "la juridiction de renvoi"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "l’article 7 du règlement no 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"action introduite";
  "action introduite"->"la juridiction de renvoi";
  "action introduite"->"l’allocation d’une indemnité s’élevant à 250 euros, en réparation du retard du vol"[dir=none];
  "l’allocation d’une indemnité s’élevant à 250 euros, en réparation du retard du vol"->"l’article 7 du règlement no 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Croatian

Osoba ZX kupila je na internetu avionsku kartu za Ryanairov let između Porta (Portugal) i Barcelone (Španjolska).
Svojom tužbom koju je na temelju članka 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004 podnio pred sudom koji je uputio zahtjev, tužitelj u glavnom postupku zatražio je naknadu štete u iznosu od 250 eura kao obeštećenje zbog kašnjenja leta u glavnom postupku.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "sudom koji je uputio zahtjev"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "članka 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Svojom tužbom";
  "Svojom tužbom"->"sudom koji je uputio zahtjev";
  "Svojom tužbom"->"naknadu štete u iznosu od 250 eura kao obeštećenje zbog kašnjenja leta"[dir=none];
  "naknadu štete u iznosu od 250 eura kao obeštećenje zbog kašnjenja leta"->"članka 7. Uredbe br. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Italian

ZX ha acquistato via internet un biglietto aereo per un volo operato da Ryanair tra Porto (Portogallo) e Barcellona (Spagna).
Con il suo ricorso proposto, dinanzi al giudice del rinvio, sulla base dell’articolo 7 del regolamento n. 261/2004, la parte ricorrente nel procedimento principale ha chiesto il versamento di una compensazione pecuniaria per un importo pari a EUR 250, a titolo di risarcimento per il ritardo del volo di cui trattasi nel procedimento principale.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "il giudice del rinvio"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolo 7 del regolamento n. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Con il suo ricorso proposto";
  "Con il suo ricorso proposto"->"il giudice del rinvio";
  "Con il suo ricorso proposto"->"versamento di una compensazione pecuniaria per un importo pari a EUR 250, a titolo di risarcimento per il ritardo del volo"[dir=none];
  "versamento di una compensazione pecuniaria per un importo pari a EUR 250, a titolo di risarcimento per il ritardo del volo"->"articolo 7 del regolamento n. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Latvian

ZX tiešsaistē nopirka aviobiļeti reisam, ko Ryanair veic no Portu (Portugāle) uz Barselonu (Spānija).
Prasītāja pamatlietā ar prasību, kas, pamatojoties uz Regulas Nr. 261/2004 7. pantu, celta iesniedzējtiesā, lūdza izmaksāt kompensāciju 250 EUR apmērā kā atlīdzību par pamatlietā aplūkotā lidojuma kavēšanos.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "iesniedzējtiesā"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Regulas Nr. 261/2004 7. pants"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"celta iesniedzējtiesā";
  "celta iesniedzējtiesā"->"iesniedzējtiesā";
  "celta iesniedzējtiesā"->"izmaksāt kompensāciju 250 EUR apmērā kā atlīdzību par pamatlietā aplūkotā lidojuma kavēšanos."[dir=none];
  "izmaksāt kompensāciju 250 EUR apmērā kā atlīdzību par pamatlietā aplūkotā lidojuma kavēšanos."->"Regulas Nr. 261/2004 7. pants"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

ZX internetu nusipirko lėktuvo bilietą Ryanair vykdomam skrydžiui iš Porto (Portugalija) į Barseloną (Ispanija).
Pagal Reglamento Nr. 261/2004 7 straipsnį prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikusiame teisme pareikštame ieškinyje ieškovė pagrindinėje byloje paprašė skirti 250 EUR kompensaciją už pagrindinėje byloje nagrinėjamo skrydžio atidėjimą.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "pateikusiame teisme"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Reglamento Nr. 261/2004 7 straipsnį"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"pareikštame ieškinyje";
  "pareikštame ieškinyje"->"pateikusiame teisme";
  "pareikštame ieškinyje"->"250 EUR kompensaciją už pagrindinėje byloje nagrinėjamo skrydžio atidėjimą."[dir=none];
  "250 EUR kompensaciją už pagrindinėje byloje nagrinėjamo skrydžio atidėjimą."->"Reglamento Nr. 261/2004 7 straipsnį"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

ZX a Ryanair által Porto (Portugália) és Barcelona (Spanyolország) között üzemeltetett légi járatra online vásárolt repülőjegyet.
A kérdést előterjesztő bíróság előtt a 261/2004 rendelet 7. cikke alapján indított keresetével az alapeljárás felperese az alapügy tárgyát képező járatkésés miatt 250 euró összegű kártalanítás megfizetését kérte.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "A kérdést előterjesztő bíróság"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "261/2004 rendelet 7. cikke"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"indított keresetével";
  "indított keresetével"->"A kérdést előterjesztő bíróság";
  "indított keresetével"->"járatkésés miatt 250 euró összegű kártalanítás megfizetését kérte."[dir=none];
  "járatkésés miatt 250 euró összegű kártalanítás megfizetését kérte."->"261/2004 rendelet 7. cikke"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Maltese

ZX xtara fuq l-internet biljett tal-ajruplan għal titjira operata minn Ryanair bejn Porto (il-Portugall) u Barcelona (Spanja).
Permezz tal-azzjoni tiegħu mressqa, quddiem il-qorti tar-rinviju, fuq il-bażi tal-Artikolu 7 tar-Regolament Nru 261/2004, ir-rikorrent fil-kawża prinċipali talab li jingħata kumpens ta’ EUR 250 għad-dewmien li ġarrbet it-titjira inkwistjoni fil-kawża prinċipali.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "il-qorti tar-rinviju"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Artikolu 7 tar-Regolament Nru 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"mressqa quddiem il-qorti tar-rinviju";
  "mressqa quddiem il-qorti tar-rinviju"->"il-qorti tar-rinviju";
  "mressqa quddiem il-qorti tar-rinviju"->"kumpens ta’ EUR 250 għad-dewmien li ġarrbet it-titjira"[dir=none];
  "kumpens ta’ EUR 250 għad-dewmien li ġarrbet it-titjira"->"Artikolu 7 tar-Regolament Nru 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Dutch

ZX heeft online een vliegticket geboekt voor een vlucht van Ryanair tussen Porto (Portugal) en Barcelona (Spanje).
Met haar bij de verwijzende rechter krachtens artikel 7 van verordening nr. 261/2004 ingestelde vordering heeft verzoekster in het hoofdgeding verzocht om een schadevergoeding ten bedrage van 250 EUR wegens vertraging van de in het hoofdgeding aan de orde zijnde vlucht.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "de verwijzende rechter"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 7 van verordening nr. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"heeft verzoekster in het hoofdgeding verzocht om een schadevergoeding";
  "heeft verzoekster in het hoofdgeding verzocht om een schadevergoeding"->"de verwijzende rechter";
  "heeft verzoekster in het hoofdgeding verzocht om een schadevergoeding"->"een schadevergoeding ten bedrage van 250 EUR wegens vertraging van de in het hoofdgeding aan de orde zijnde vlucht."[dir=none];
  "een schadevergoeding ten bedrage van 250 EUR wegens vertraging van de in het hoofdgeding aan de orde zijnde vlucht."->"artikel 7 van verordening nr. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Polish

ZX kupił przez Internet bilet na lot obsługiwany przez przewoźnika lotniczego Ryanair między Porto (Portugalia) a Barceloną (Hiszpania).
W ramach powództwa wniesionego do sądu odsyłającego na podstawie art. 7 rozporządzenia nr 261/2004 strona powodowa w postępowaniu głównym wniosła o przyznanie jej odszkodowania w wysokości 250 EUR z tytułu opóźnienia lotu będącego przedmiotem sporu w postępowaniu głównym.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "sąd odsyłający"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "art. 7 rozporządzenia nr 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"wniesionego do sądu";
  "wniesionego do sądu"->"sąd odsyłający";
  "wniesionego do sądu"->"odszkodowania w wysokości 250 EUR z tytułu opóźnienia lotu"[dir=none];
  "odszkodowania w wysokości 250 EUR z tytułu opóźnienia lotu"->"art. 7 rozporządzenia nr 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

ZX comprou online um bilhete para um voo operado pela Ryanair entre Porto (Portugal) e Barcelona (Espanha).
Com a sua ação, intentada perante o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio, com fundamento no artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004, a demandante no processo principal pediu que lhe fosse atribuída uma indemnização no montante de 250 euros a título de reparação pelo atraso do voo em causa no processo principal.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "órgão jurisdicional de reenvio"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Com a sua ação, intentada perante o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio, com fundamento no artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004";
  "Com a sua ação, intentada perante o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio, com fundamento no artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004"->"órgão jurisdicional de reenvio";
  "Com a sua ação, intentada perante o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio, com fundamento no artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004"->"uma indemnização no montante de 250 euros a título de reparação pelo atraso do voo"[dir=none];
  "uma indemnização no montante de 250 euros a título de reparação pelo atraso do voo"->"artigo 7.o do Regulamento n.o 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Romanian

ZX a cumpărat online un bilet de avion pentru un zbor operat de Ryanair între Porto (Portugalia) și Barcelona (Spania).
Prin acțiunea introdusă la instanța de trimitere în temeiul articolului 7 din Regulamentul nr. 261/2004, reclamantul din litigiul principal a solicitat acordarea unei despăgubiri în valoare de 250 de euro ca reparație pentru întârzierea zborului în discuție în litigiul principal.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "instanța de trimitere"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolului 7 din Regulamentul nr. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Prin acțiunea introdusă";
  "Prin acțiunea introdusă"->"instanța de trimitere";
  "Prin acțiunea introdusă"->"Despăgubiri în valoare de 250 de euro ca reparație pentru întârzierea zborului"[dir=none];
  "Despăgubiri în valoare de 250 de euro ca reparație pentru întârzierea zborului"->"articolului 7 din Regulamentul nr. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Osoba ZX (ďalej len „žalobca“) si kúpila letenku na lietadlo na let, ktorého prevádzkovateľom je Ryanair, z mesta Porto (Portugalsko) do Barcelony (Španielsko).
Svojou žalobou podanou pred vnútroštátnym súdom na základe článku 7 nariadenia č. 261/2004 sa žalobca vo veci samej domáha náhrady dosahujúcej 250 eur za meškanie letu, ktorého sa týka spor vo veci samej.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "vnútroštátnym súdom"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "článku 7 nariadenia č. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"Svojou žalobou podanou pred vnútroštátnym súdom";
  "Svojou žalobou podanou pred vnútroštátnym súdom"->"vnútroštátnym súdom";
  "Svojou žalobou podanou pred vnútroštátnym súdom"->"náhrady dosahujúcej 250 eur za meškanie letu"[dir=none];
  "náhrady dosahujúcej 250 eur za meškanie letu"->"článku 7 nariadenia č. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

ZX je kupil letalsko karto za let med Portom (Portugalska) in Barcelono (Španija), ki ga upravlja letalska družba Ryanair.
Tožeča stranka v postopku v glavni stvari je s tožbo, vloženo pri predložitvenem sodišču, na podlagi člena 7 Uredbe št. 261/2004 zahtevala odškodnino v višini 250 EUR zaradi zamude leta iz postopka v glavni stvari.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "predložitvenem sodišču"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "člena 7 Uredbe št. 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"s tožbo";
  "s tožbo"->"predložitvenem sodišču";
  "s tožbo"->"odškodnino v višini 250 EUR zaradi zamude leta"[dir=none];
  "odškodnino v višini 250 EUR zaradi zamude leta"->"člena 7 Uredbe št. 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Finnish

ZX osti verkossa lentolipun Ryanairin liikennöimälle Porton (Portugali) ja Barcelonan (Espanja) väliselle lennolle.
Pääasian kantaja vaati ennakkoratkaisua pyytäneessä tuomioistuimessa nostamassaan kanteessa asetuksen N:o 261/2004 7 artiklan perusteella 250 euron suuruista korvausta pääasiassa kyseessä olevan lennon viivästymisestä.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "ennakkoratkaisua pyytäneessä tuomioistuimessa"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "asetuksen N:o 261/2004 7 artiklan"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"nostamassaan kanteessa";
  "nostamassaan kanteessa"->"ennakkoratkaisua pyytäneessä tuomioistuimessa";
  "nostamassaan kanteessa"->"250 euron suuruista korvausta pääasiassa kyseessä olevan lennon viivästymisestä."[dir=none];
  "250 euron suuruista korvausta pääasiassa kyseessä olevan lennon viivästymisestä."->"asetuksen N:o 261/2004 7 artiklan"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 11 April 2019.
ZX v Ryanair DAC.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil n° 1 de Gerona.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Determination of the court having jurisdiction to hear an application for compensation in respect of a delayed flight — Article 7(5) — Operations of a branch — Article 26 — Implied prorogation — Requirement that the defendant enter an appearance.
Case C-464/18. (2019)
Language: Swedish

ZX köpte via internet en biljett för en flygning med Ryanair mellan Porto (Portugal) och Barcelona (Spanien).
I sin talan vid den hänskjutande domstolen, som väcktes med stöd av artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004, har sökanden i det nationella målet begärt skadestånd på 250 euro som ersättning för den i det nationella målet aktuella försenade flygningen.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "den hänskjutande domstolen"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ZX"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "ZX"->"väcktes med stöd av artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004";
  "väcktes med stöd av artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004"->"den hänskjutande domstolen";
  "väcktes med stöd av artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004"->"skadestånd på 250 euro som ersättning för den i det nationella målet aktuella försenade flygningen."[dir=none];
  "skadestånd på 250 euro som ersättning för den i det nationella målet aktuella försenade flygningen."->"artikel 7 i förordning nr 261/2004"[dir=none];
    
}