The obligation of national Courts against whose decision there is no judicial remedy to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Open access

Abstract

The present paper presents the obligation that courts in the member states of the European Union have to refer questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union, with a focus on courts against whose decision there is no judicial remedy under national law. The paper starts by presenting the applicable framework regarding the preliminary reference procedure, then focuses on analyzing the exceptions to national court’s duty under article 267 TFEU, with a focus on the direction in which the case law is heading based on the most recent judgments handed down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in 2015, finally presenting the author’s conclusions and observation on the subject.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Damian Chalmers Gareth Davies Giorgio Monti - European Union Law: Cases and Materials 2nd Edition Oxford University Press Oxford 2010;

  • 2. Paul Craig Grainne de Burca - EU Law: Text Cases and Materials 5th Edition Oxford University Press Oxford 2011;

  • 3. Statistics concerning judicial activity in 2014 available at http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2015-03/cp150027en.pdf last accessed on the 30th of November 2015.

  • Judgments of the Courte of Justice of the European Union:

  • 4. Case 283/81 - Srl CILFIT and Lanificio di Gavardo SpA v Ministry of Health. [1082] ECR 03415;

  • 5. Joined Cases 28 to 30/62 – Da Costa v Nederlandse Belastingadministratie [1963] ECR 31;

  • 6. Case C-224/01 - Gerhard Kobler v Republic of Austria [2003] ECR 2003 I-10239;

  • 7. Case C-46/93 - Brasserie du Pecheur and Factortame [1996] ECR I-1029;

  • 8. C-495/03 - Intermodal Transports BV v Staatssecretaris van Financien [2005] ECR I-08151;

  • 9. Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14 – X v Joined Cases C-72/14 and C-197/14 and T.A. Van Dijk v Staatssecretaris van Financien not yet reported.

  • 10. Case C-160/14 - João Filipe Ferreira da Silva e Brito and Others v Estado portugues not yet reported.

  • Advocate-General’s opinions:

  • 11. Opinion of Advocate General Stix-Hackl delivered on 12 April 2005 in Case C-495/03 - Intermodal Transports BV v Staatssecretaris van Financien;

  • 12. Opinion of Advocate General Wahl delivered on 13 May 2015 - Joined Cases C - 72/14 and C-197/14 X.

Search
Journal information
Target audience: experts in the field of Romanian Law
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 367 176 2
PDF Downloads 191 95 0