Preliminary Rulings

Question 1

SAT Fluggelgesellschaft v EUROCONTROL

Answer 1

Preliminary rulings aren’t an appeals procedure.

Question 2

Kuhne & Heitz

Answer 2

Obligation on an administrative body to review a final administrative decision in order to take account of the interpretation of the relevant provision given in the meantime by the CJEU if (1) power to reopen under national law, (2) decision is final, or (3) decision was based on a misinterpretation of EU law which was not referred.

Question 3

Arsenal Football Club v Reed

Answer 3

High Court found CJEU had made findings of fact which conflicted with the facts they had established, refused to accept the ruling. Court of Appeal overturned High Court decision, inconsistency didn’t arise from different facts but from a variance in legal reasoning.

Question 4

Foglio v Novello

Answer 4

No admissibility where there is no genuine dispute.

Question 5

Wienand Meilicke v Meyer

Answer 5

No admissibility where the questions are irrelevant or hypothetical.

Question 6

Irish Creamery Suppliers case

Answer 6

No admissibility where the national court has failed to provide sufficient legal or factual information

Question 7

Politi s.a.s v Ministry of Finance of the Italian Commissie

Answer 7

Dutch appeals Committee for General Medicine was under consideration, heard appeals from other bodies and was indirectly recognised by Dutch law, held it was a court/tribunal, it operated with the approval and assistance of the public authorities, reached decisions after granted a full hearing, its decisions affected the right to work under EU law, were final and were not subject to appeal to the ordinary courts.

Question 8

Nordsee Deutsche Horchseefischerei

Answer 8

Arbitration not a “court or tribunal”, contracting parties were under no obligation to refer dispute to arbitration and public authorities were not involved.

Question 9

Syfait

Answer 9

Court held that level of state involvement (through national authorities) in the operation of the referring body is a strong indication of its independence.

Question 10

Dorsch Consult

Answer 10

Six criteria which indicate body/tribunal, must: (1) be established by law, (2) have a permanent existence, (3) exercise binding jurisdiction, (4) its procedures must be inter partes, (5) apply the rule of law, and (6) be independent.

Question 11

Bollinger v Bollinger

Answer 11

Criteria to consider for necessity to refer: (1) time to get ruling, (2) do not overload the court, (3) formulate the question clearly, (4) difficulty and importance, (5) expense, (6) wishes of the parties.

Question 12

R v International Stock Exchange

Answer 12

Is the question of EU law critical to the outcome of the case? If yes, refer.

Question 13

Trinity Mirror Case

Answer 13

Reference is most appropriate where the ruling is likely to promote the uniform application of EU law throughout the EU, references inappropriate where the ruling was unlikely to have any application beyond the case in hand.

Question 14

Rheinmuhlen

Answer 14

Higher courts cannot stop lower courts from making references.

Question 15

R v Plymouth Justices (ex parte Rogers)

Answer 15

Reference can be made by Magistrates Court but it can be quashed on appeal. Higher courts may be in better position to assess need for reference.

Question 16

Kobler v Austria

Answer 16

Agreed that states may be sued for failure to refer where there is an obligation to do so. In this case failure was not manifestly apparent as it had acted in good faith that the matter was covered by a previous CJEU decision.

Question 17

Da Costa en Schaake

Answer 17

National court can still refer a point if there has already been a ruling, but such an application must raise some new factor or argument.

Question 18

CILFIT

Answer 18

Ruling is not necessary where: (1) the question is not relevant to the conclusion of the case, (2) the provision has already been interpreted by the CJEU through previous identical question, (3) the correct application of EU law is so obvious that there is no reasonable doubt over the answer to any questions raised, doctrine of acte clair.

Question 19

ICC Case

Answer 19

Decisions of the CJEU have precedential impact on all national courts, only the CJEU may find EU law invalid.

Question 20

Firma Foto-Frost case

Answer 20

National court didn’t have power to declare void a Commission decision for breaching a Community regulation.

Question 21

Gaston Schul

Answer 21

Unqualified obligation to refer, national courts have no jurisdiction themselves to determine that acts of Union institutions are valid.