Standing and Preliminary References
Article 267 TFEU: the interpretation of the treaty and the validity and interpretation of any
secondary measure:
1. Some courts may ask the CJ to give a ruling (Discretionary Courts)
- Any domestic court or tribunal may refer
2. Some national courts shall ask the CJ to give a ruling (Mandatory Courts)
- Only domestic courts of last instance; does not have to be the supreme court of
the state.
The Court of Justice is there to tell Member State courts how to apply EU laws, not to resolve
disputes.
What Questions may be referred?
- Both EU and domestic legislation and laws may be referred (Drozi v Belgium)
- Provisions and concepts taken from community law are to be interpreted
uniformly (Leur-Bloem)
What Questions may not be referred?
- Art 275 + 276: Questions about the common foreign and security policy.
What is the definition of a ‘court or tribunal’?
- Dorsch Consult dictates that it is only the CJ that may decide which courts may ask
questions, not domestic courts. The CJ will take into account:
1. Is the body established in law?
2. Is the body permanent?
3. Whether it’s jurisdiction is compulsory?
4. Whether it’s jurisdiction is inter partes?
5. Whether it applies law?
6. Whether it is independent?
, The CJ only cares about what the body does, i.e. does it deal with law, if so then it may
ask questions.
- Broekmeulen: allowed the GP registration commission to ask questions.
- Pretore di Salo: the court has jurisdiction to reply to a request from a preliminary ruling
by a judge in a member state.
Compare:
- Nordsee: The court refused to give a reference about an architectural contract as the
body referring it was set up by private contract and not domestic law.
- SYFIAT: The court did not accept the reference from the Greek competition authority as
the body was not sufficiently separate from the state.
What is the scope and discretion of domestic courts in referring questions to the CJEU
under Art 267?
- Rheinmuhlen: the widest discretion. Domestic law may not prevent the court from
referring regulation merely because a higher court has given precedent.
- Irish Milk Suppliers Association: references must be made with considerations of
‘procedural organization’ and ‘efficiency’ in mind.
- Elchinov: A national court exercising it’s Art. 267 discretion, is bound by the
interpretation of the CJ and must, if necessary, disregard the interpretation of EU law of
a higher domestic court.
- Foglia: The CJ will not answer questions which are deemed ‘not genuine’.
- Foglia (No.2): While it is for domestic courts to have discretion in referring questions, it if
for the CJ to examine the grounds on which to accept or reject the claim.
- Philip Morris: the need for a preliminary rule is at the discretion of the domestic court.
- Where questions submitted concern the interpretation and validity of EU law, the
court is bound to give a ruling.
The court may refuse to give a ruling:
- Where the question bearn no relation to the facts of the main action
- Where the question is hypothetical (Meilicke)
, - Where the court does not have the factual or legal material necessary
(Telemarsicabruzzo)
Domestic courts who have to refer to the CJEU.
- Domestic courts of Last instance (Lyckeskog)
What are the circumstances when a court cannot refer?
- Hoffmann-La Roche introduced two exceptions:
1. The Principle of Precedent (a measure that has already been clarified)
- Does not need to be identical (CLIFIT)
2. Principle of Act Clair (where the answer is clear). Three questions need to be asked in
relation to obviousness:
- Language: does it mean the same in every language
- Terminology: does the legal terminology mean the same in all languages.
- Context: have to read the articles with their intent.
Da Silva: If there are different interpretations in one country then a court must refer a
case.
Van Dijk: a domestic court does not have to wait for an answer from the CJ on a similar
issue to refer a question.
Lord Bingham in Samex: The decision as to whether a question is Act Clair is better
decided by the CJ than a national court.
The effect of an Art. 267 Judgement:
- Jonkman: there is a CJ duty to comply with EU law objectives. A national law that is in
contrast with EU law must be cast aside without being referred to the CJ.
- If a domestic judge does not know whether a union measure is legal or not, the judge
may:
- Declare the law valid.
Article 267 TFEU: the interpretation of the treaty and the validity and interpretation of any
secondary measure:
1. Some courts may ask the CJ to give a ruling (Discretionary Courts)
- Any domestic court or tribunal may refer
2. Some national courts shall ask the CJ to give a ruling (Mandatory Courts)
- Only domestic courts of last instance; does not have to be the supreme court of
the state.
The Court of Justice is there to tell Member State courts how to apply EU laws, not to resolve
disputes.
What Questions may be referred?
- Both EU and domestic legislation and laws may be referred (Drozi v Belgium)
- Provisions and concepts taken from community law are to be interpreted
uniformly (Leur-Bloem)
What Questions may not be referred?
- Art 275 + 276: Questions about the common foreign and security policy.
What is the definition of a ‘court or tribunal’?
- Dorsch Consult dictates that it is only the CJ that may decide which courts may ask
questions, not domestic courts. The CJ will take into account:
1. Is the body established in law?
2. Is the body permanent?
3. Whether it’s jurisdiction is compulsory?
4. Whether it’s jurisdiction is inter partes?
5. Whether it applies law?
6. Whether it is independent?
, The CJ only cares about what the body does, i.e. does it deal with law, if so then it may
ask questions.
- Broekmeulen: allowed the GP registration commission to ask questions.
- Pretore di Salo: the court has jurisdiction to reply to a request from a preliminary ruling
by a judge in a member state.
Compare:
- Nordsee: The court refused to give a reference about an architectural contract as the
body referring it was set up by private contract and not domestic law.
- SYFIAT: The court did not accept the reference from the Greek competition authority as
the body was not sufficiently separate from the state.
What is the scope and discretion of domestic courts in referring questions to the CJEU
under Art 267?
- Rheinmuhlen: the widest discretion. Domestic law may not prevent the court from
referring regulation merely because a higher court has given precedent.
- Irish Milk Suppliers Association: references must be made with considerations of
‘procedural organization’ and ‘efficiency’ in mind.
- Elchinov: A national court exercising it’s Art. 267 discretion, is bound by the
interpretation of the CJ and must, if necessary, disregard the interpretation of EU law of
a higher domestic court.
- Foglia: The CJ will not answer questions which are deemed ‘not genuine’.
- Foglia (No.2): While it is for domestic courts to have discretion in referring questions, it if
for the CJ to examine the grounds on which to accept or reject the claim.
- Philip Morris: the need for a preliminary rule is at the discretion of the domestic court.
- Where questions submitted concern the interpretation and validity of EU law, the
court is bound to give a ruling.
The court may refuse to give a ruling:
- Where the question bearn no relation to the facts of the main action
- Where the question is hypothetical (Meilicke)
, - Where the court does not have the factual or legal material necessary
(Telemarsicabruzzo)
Domestic courts who have to refer to the CJEU.
- Domestic courts of Last instance (Lyckeskog)
What are the circumstances when a court cannot refer?
- Hoffmann-La Roche introduced two exceptions:
1. The Principle of Precedent (a measure that has already been clarified)
- Does not need to be identical (CLIFIT)
2. Principle of Act Clair (where the answer is clear). Three questions need to be asked in
relation to obviousness:
- Language: does it mean the same in every language
- Terminology: does the legal terminology mean the same in all languages.
- Context: have to read the articles with their intent.
Da Silva: If there are different interpretations in one country then a court must refer a
case.
Van Dijk: a domestic court does not have to wait for an answer from the CJ on a similar
issue to refer a question.
Lord Bingham in Samex: The decision as to whether a question is Act Clair is better
decided by the CJ than a national court.
The effect of an Art. 267 Judgement:
- Jonkman: there is a CJ duty to comply with EU law objectives. A national law that is in
contrast with EU law must be cast aside without being referred to the CJ.
- If a domestic judge does not know whether a union measure is legal or not, the judge
may:
- Declare the law valid.
