# C_2021289EN.01002801.xml

| 19.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad (Bulgaria) lodged on 5 May 2021 — IG v Varhoven administrativen sad

(Case C-289/21)

(2021/C 289/39)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad Sofia-grad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: IG

Defendant: Varhoven administrativen sad

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the amendment of a provision of a national normative legal act previously declared by a court of appeal to be incompatible with an applicable provision of EU law relieve the Court of Cassation of the obligation to examine the provision applicable prior to the amendment and accordingly to assess whether it is compatible with EU law? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the amendment of a provision of a national normative legal act previously declared by a court of appeal to be incompatible with an applicable provision of EU law relieve the Court of Cassation of the obligation to examine the provision applicable prior to the amendment and accordingly to assess whether it is compatible with EU law?

| 2. | Does the presumption that the provision at issue has been withdrawn constitute an effective remedy with regard to rights and freedoms guaranteed by EU law (in casu, Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 2012/27/EU), (1) or does the possibility provided for in national law to examine whether the national provision in question was compatible with EU law before it was amended constitute such a remedy if it exists only if the competent court is seised of a specific action for damages on account of that provision and only in relation to the person who brought the action? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the presumption that the provision at issue has been withdrawn constitute an effective remedy with regard to rights and freedoms guaranteed by EU law (in casu, Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 2012/27/EU), (1) or does the possibility provided for in national law to examine whether the national provision in question was compatible with EU law before it was amended constitute such a remedy if it exists only if the competent court is seised of a specific action for damages on account of that provision and only in relation to the person who brought the action?

| 3. | If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative, is it permissible for the provision in question to continue to regulate, during the period between its adoption and its amendment, legal relationships in respect of an unlimited group of persons who have not brought actions for damages on account of that provision, or for the assessment of the compatibility of the national rule with the EU law provision in respect of the period prior to the amendment not to have been carried out in relation to those persons? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If Question 2 is answered in the affirmative, is it permissible for the provision in question to continue to regulate, during the period between its adoption and its amendment, legal relationships in respect of an unlimited group of persons who have not brought actions for damages on account of that provision, or for the assessment of the compatibility of the national rule with the EU law provision in respect of the period prior to the amendment not to have been carried out in relation to those persons?

---

(1)  Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC (OJ 2012 L 315, p. 1).

---