25.5.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 147/2

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 28 January 2013 — Andreas Kainz AG v Pantherwerke AG

(Case C-45/13)

2013/C 147/04

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Andreas Kainz

Defendant: Pantherwerke AG

Questions referred

1.

Is the ‘place where the harmful event occurred or may occur’ in Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 (1) (‘Regulation No 44/2001’) to be interpreted, in relation to product liability, as meaning:

1.1

that the place of the event giving rise to the damage (Handlungsort) is the place where the manufacturer is established;

1.2

that the place of the event giving rise to the damage (Handlungsort) is the place where the product is put into circulation;

1.3

that the place of the event giving rise to the damage (Handlungsort) is the place where the product is put into circulation;

2.

If Question 1.2 is answered in the affirmative:

2.1

Is the product put into circulation when it has left the manufacturing process operated by the producer and enters a marketing process in the form in which it is offered to the public in order to be used or consumed?

2.2

Is the product put into circulation when it is marketed in a structured way to end-users?

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1).