C-291/21 Starkinvest。是否可以使用欧洲账户保全令来确保罚款的支付?

Q3 Social Sciences Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional Pub Date : 2023-10-06 DOI:10.20318/cdt.2023.8111
Carlos Santaló Goris
{"title":"C-291/21 Starkinvest。是否可以使用欧洲账户保全令来确保罚款的支付?","authors":"Carlos Santaló Goris","doi":"10.20318/cdt.2023.8111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In case C-291/21, Starkintest, the CJEU examined whether a judgment establishing a penalty order was a valid enforceable title to apply for an EAPO intended to secure an amount due to because of a penalty payment. When applying for an EAPO, creditors have to prove the likelihood to success on the substance of their claim or fumus boni iuris, unless they have an enforceable title. The CJEU found that the judgment establishing the penalty order was not a valid title that would prevent the creditor from satisfying the fumus boni iuris. Nonetheless, at the same time, the CJEU confirmed that the EAPO could be used to secure claims arising from a penalty payment, even if there is not a specific provision addressing it as in the Brussels I bis Regulation.","PeriodicalId":36196,"journal":{"name":"Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"C-291/21, Starkinvest. Can a European Account Preservation Order be employed to secure a penalty payment?\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Santaló Goris\",\"doi\":\"10.20318/cdt.2023.8111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In case C-291/21, Starkintest, the CJEU examined whether a judgment establishing a penalty order was a valid enforceable title to apply for an EAPO intended to secure an amount due to because of a penalty payment. When applying for an EAPO, creditors have to prove the likelihood to success on the substance of their claim or fumus boni iuris, unless they have an enforceable title. The CJEU found that the judgment establishing the penalty order was not a valid title that would prevent the creditor from satisfying the fumus boni iuris. Nonetheless, at the same time, the CJEU confirmed that the EAPO could be used to secure claims arising from a penalty payment, even if there is not a specific provision addressing it as in the Brussels I bis Regulation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36196,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2023.8111\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2023.8111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在Starkintest案件C-291/21中,欧洲高等法院审查了一项建立罚款令的判决是否为申请EAPO的有效可执行权利,该判决旨在确保因罚款支付而导致的金额。在申请EAPO时,债权人必须证明其债权的实质或法律依据成功的可能性,除非他们拥有可执行的所有权。法院认为,设立处罚令的判决不是有效的所有权,会妨碍债权人履行物权规定。尽管如此,与此同时,欧洲法院确认,EAPO可以用于确保因罚款支付而产生的索赔,即使没有像布鲁塞尔I - bis条例那样的具体规定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
C-291/21, Starkinvest. Can a European Account Preservation Order be employed to secure a penalty payment?
In case C-291/21, Starkintest, the CJEU examined whether a judgment establishing a penalty order was a valid enforceable title to apply for an EAPO intended to secure an amount due to because of a penalty payment. When applying for an EAPO, creditors have to prove the likelihood to success on the substance of their claim or fumus boni iuris, unless they have an enforceable title. The CJEU found that the judgment establishing the penalty order was not a valid title that would prevent the creditor from satisfying the fumus boni iuris. Nonetheless, at the same time, the CJEU confirmed that the EAPO could be used to secure claims arising from a penalty payment, even if there is not a specific provision addressing it as in the Brussels I bis Regulation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
157
期刊最新文献
A. Durán Ayago. Derechos humanos y método de reconocimiento de situaciones jurídicas: Hacia la libre circulación de personas y familias. Perspectiva internacional y europea. I. Lorente Martinez. Daños punitivos y Derecho internacional privado La odisea judicial entre London Steam-Ship Owners-Mutual Insurance Association Limited y el Reino de España Pedro A. de Miguel Asensio. Manual de Derecho de las Nuevas Tecnologías. Derecho digital. Romero Matute, Yeray. El arbitraje internacional deportivo. La acción de nulidad, el reconocimiento y ejecución de los laudos arbitrales del CAS/TAS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1