Source: European Parliament
Under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, where a question on the interpretation of acts of the institutions 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, that court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
The CJEU has declared that a court or tribunal against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law is required, where a question of Community law is raised before it, to comply with its obligation to bring the matter before the Court of Justice, unless it has established that the question raised is irrelevant or that the Community provision in question has already been interpreted by the Court or that the correct application of Community law is so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt[1].
Therefore, national courts against whose decisions there is no remedy under national law and which refuse to refer to the CJEU a preliminary question on the interpretation of EU law that has been raised before them are obliged to give reasons for their refusal in the light of the exceptions provided for in the case-law of the CJEU[2].
In the judgment referred to by the Honourable Member, the Spanish Supreme Court (Court of last resort) stated that the arguments set out in the case and the judgments of the CJEU mentioned therein made it unnecessary to raise a preliminary question before the CJEU for the resolution of the appeal.
Therefore, the Supreme Court did not have doubts on the interpretation of the relevant EU law that would make it necessary to bring the matter before the CJEU for the resolution of the appeal.
The Commission does not intend to take further action.