62022CO0495_INF
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 27 April 2023 –Ministero della Giustizia v SP (Competition for notarial posts)
(Case C‑495/22)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Articles 53 and 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Article 267 TFEU – Scope of the obligation on national courts or tribunals of last instance to make a reference for a preliminary ruling – Exceptions to that obligation – Criteria – Situations in which the correct interpretation of EU law is so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt – Condition related to the national court or tribunal of last instance being convinced that the matter would be equally obvious to the other courts or tribunals of last instance of the Member States and to the Court of Justice)
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Reference to the Court – Issues of interpretation – Obligation to make a reference for a preliminary ruling – None – Conditions – No reasonable doubt – Criteria
(Art. 267 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 17-20, 26-36, operative part)
Operative part
Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a national court or tribunal against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law may refrain from referring to the Court a question concerning the interpretation of EU law and take upon itself the responsibility for resolving it where the correct interpretation of EU law is so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt. The question whether such a possibility exists must be assessed on the basis of the characteristic features of EU law, the particular difficulties to which its interpretation gives rise and the risk of divergences in judicial decisions within the European Union.
That national court or tribunal is not required to establish in detail that the other courts or tribunals of last instance of the Member States and the Court would give the same interpretation, but must have obtained the conviction, according to an assessment which takes account of those factors, that the matter would be equally obvious to those other national courts or tribunals and to the Court.