This presentation is Co-funded by the Civil Justice Programme of the European Union Project
JUST/2013/JCIV/AG/4691 „The Court of Justice of the European Union and its case law in the area of civil justice”.
The Preliminary Reference Procedure
Aleksandra Melesko
10 June 2015
Baltic Beach Hotel, Jūrmala

Most of the cases submitted to the Court of Justice are now references
for a preliminary ruling from the courts and tribunals of the Member
States of the EU (in 2014, 428 out of 622 new cases)

New Rules of Procedure were adopted in 2012 which make the rules that
apply to preliminary references clearer and more comprehensive for
litigants and national courts

Recommendations to national courts and tribunals in relation to the
initiation of
preliminary ruling proceedings (available at:
www.curia.europa.eu)
Article 19 TEU:
The Court of Justice of the European Union shall include the Court of
Justice, the General Court and specialised courts. It shall ensure that in the
interpretation and application of the Treaties the law is observed.
◦ Court of Justice
◦ General Court
◦ Civil Service Tribunal
Article 19 TEU:
The Court of Justice of the EU shall, in accordance with the Treaties:
(a)
(b)
(c)
rule on actions brought by a Member State, an institution or a natural or
legal person,
give preliminary rulings, at the request of courts or tribunals of the
Member States, on the interpretation of Union law or the validity of acts
adopted by the institutions,
rule on other cases provided for in the Treaties.
Article 19 TEU:

One judge from each Member State; assisted by Advocates General

The Judges and the Advocates General shall be chosen from persons whose
independence is beyond doubt and who satisfy the conditions set out in
Articles 253 and 254 TFEU; they shall be appointed by common accord of
the governments of the Member States for six years
Court of Justice alone has jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings
(Article 256(3) TFEU grants the General Court jurisdiction to hear
questions referred for a preliminary ruling in specific areas laid down
by the Statute, but no such transfer has taken place yet)
Article 267 TFEU
“The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction to give
preliminary rulings concerning:
(a)
(b)
The interpretation of the Treaties;
The validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices or
agencies of the Union;
(…)”

Judicial cooperation / dialogue

Plays decisive role in the development of EU law and its integration into national legal
systems

Ensures uniform application and interpretation of EU law in order to achieve a successful
internal market

Safeguard against diverging interpretations of EU law
622 new cases – 428 references
719 completed cases – 476 references
Average duration of proceedings – 15 months
(16,3 in 2013)
787 pending cases – 526 references

Court of Justice does not:
◦ establish the facts/apply the law to those facts,
◦ invalidate or interpret provisions of national law,
◦ set aside judgments of national courts and tribunals.

Respective tasks: the national court establishes the facts
the Court of Justice
interprets provisions of EU law
the national court applies that interpretation to
the facts of the case pending before it
In order to ensure effective cooperation, it is important for the national courts to
provide the Court with the necessary tools enabling it to deliver a useful judgment
Article 267 TFEU
“(…) Where such a question is raised before any court or
tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal may, if it
considers that a decision on the question is necessary to enable it
to give judgment, request the Court to give a ruling thereon.
Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a
court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions
there is no judicial remedy under national law, the court or
tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court. (…)”

Referring court’s discretion to refer cannot be restricted!

Different approaches depending on the Member State in case of doubt: to decide or
to refer?

At any stage of proceedings

The necessity criterion: as soon as it finds that a ruling on the interpretation or validity
of EU law is necessary to enable it to give judgment (no general or hypothetical
questions)

Desirable that a reference should be made when the referring court is able to define
the legal and factual context of the case so that the Court of Justice has all the
necessary information

Appeals against the decision to refer ?

Stay of the national proceedings

Possibility for the referring court to withdraw its reference
Article 100(1) of the Rules of Procedure:
“The Court shall remain seised of a request for a preliminary ruling for as long as it is not
withdrawn by the court or tribunal which made that request to the Court. The withdrawal of a
request may be taken into account until notice of the date of delivery of the judgment has been
served on the interested persons referred to in Article 23 of the Statute”.

Consequences of the failure to refer? (state liability, infringement action against the Member
State)

Any form allowed by national law

«Owing to the need to translate it into all the official languages of the European Union, the
request should therefore be drafted simply; clearly and precisely, avoiding superfluous detail»
(Recommendations, point 21)

About 10 pages is often sufficient (anything exceeding 20 pages will be automatically
summarised!)
Rules of Procedure, article 94:

A summary of the subject-matter and the relevant findings of fact, as determined by the
referring court

The tenor of any national provisions applicable + relevant national case-law

Statement of the reasons which prompted the national court to refer a question
+ The relevant EU law provisions, brief description of parties’ main arguments, brief
statement of national judge’s own views on the answer to be given
Questions should appear in a separate and clearly identified section
The «Lost in Translation» effect! (translation into all the EU official languages +
sent to the Member States to enable them to submit observations)
Requests for clarification (Rules of Procedure, article 101)
Case C-202/11 Las (judgment of 16 April 2013)
Question from the referring court:
“Does the Decree on the Use of Languages infringe Article 45 TFEU concerning freedom
of movement for workers within the European Union, in that it imposes an obligation on an
undertaking established in the Dutch-speaking region when hiring a worker in the context of
employment relations with an international character, to draft all documents relating to the
employment relationship in Dutch, on pain of nullity?”
The Court:
“By its question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Article 45 TFEU must be
interpreted as precluding legislation of a federated entity of a Member State, such as that at
issue in the main proceedings, which requires all employers whose established place of business is
located in that entity’s territory to draft cross-border employment contracts exclusively in the
official language of that federated entity…”.

Case registered & submissions translated into French

Juge-rapporteur

Preliminary report

Reply by reasoned order where a question referred is identical to a question on which the
Court has already ruled, where the reply may be clearly deduced from the existing case-law or
where the answer admits of no reasonable doubt (Rules of procedure, article 99)

Hearing?

Advocate General’s Opinion?

Deliberations – judgment – translated back into the language of the case

Written observations all arrive at the same time (importance of the hearing)

Notification to Member states and EU institutions

Need for interpretation (the “Lost in Translation” effect)

No procedure for fact-finding
Article 23a of the Statute, Articles 105 to 114 of the Rules of procedure


Expedited procedure
Urgent preliminary reference procedure
Generally, the application of those special procedures is made pursuant to a
reasoned request from the referring court.
Exceptionally, the Court of Justice may decide of its own motion to use these
procedures if the nature or the particular circumstances of the case so require.
! Should only be used when absolutely necessary and in particular circumstances
(significant constraints on all those involved)
Articles 105-106 of the Rules of procedure

Any area / where the nature of the case requires that it be dealt with within a short
time

The President immediately fixes the date for the hearing + Written observations
lodged within a time-limit prescribed by the President
Example
Case C-181/14 G ( request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof,
Germany) lodged on 14 April 2014, still pending):
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of the Community code
relating to medicinal products for human use. The request has been made in criminal
proceedings brought against G, in which he is accused of having sold herbal mixes containing
in particular various synthetic cannabinoids. At first instance, G was sentenced to four and a
half years’ imprisonment and a fine of EUR 200 000 for marketing of unsafe medicinal
products. In its order of 6 May 2014, the Court held that it is apparent from the order for
reference that G’s continued detention depends solely on the answer to be given to the
question referred by the referring court. In those circumstances, the nature of the case
justifies its being dealt with within a short time. Accordingly, the Court ordered ex officio that
the case be dealt with under the expedited procedure.
As of March 1, 2008
Articles 107-114 of the Rules of procedure

Areas covered by Title V of Part Three of the TFEU, relating to the area of freedom, security
and justice

For example, in cases where a person in custody or deprived of his liberty, where the answer to
the question raised is decisive as to the assessment of that person’s legal situation, or in
proceedings concerning parental authority or custody of children, where the identity of the court
having jurisdiction under EU law depends on the answer to the question referred for a
preliminary ruling

Effects within the case: binding on the referring court or tribunal, on the parties

Effects beyond the particular case: binding on other courts and national
administrations (to ensure uniform application of EU law)

However, national courts are entitled to make a new reference to the Court of Justice,
even on an issue which has already been subject of a judgment. On limited occasions,
the Court has in the past reconsidered its previous case-law.