EUR-Lex - 61998O0422 - EN
Avis juridique important
|
61998O0422
Order of the Court of 2 March 1999.
-
Colonia Versicherung AG Zweigniederlassung München and Others v Belgian State.
-
Reference for a preliminary ruling: Tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles - Belgium.
-
Reference for a preliminary ruling - Inadmissibility.
-
Case C-422/98.
European Court reports 1999 Page I-01279
Summary
Keywords
Preliminary rulings - Admissibility - Questions unaccompanied by sufficient information as to their factual and legislative context - Questions referred in a context where no useful answer is possible (EC Treaty, Art. 177; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 20)
Summary
In order to reach an interpretation of Community law which will be of use to the national court, it is essential that the national court define the factual and legislative context of the questions it is asking or, at the very least, explain the factual circumstances on which those questions are based.
The information provided in orders for reference must not only be such as to enable the Court usefully to reply but must also make it possible for the governments of the Member States and other interested parties to submit observations pursuant to Article 20 of the EC Statute of the Court of Justice.
Furthermore, given that, pursuant to that provision, only the orders for reference are notified to the interested parties, the fact that the national court refers to the observations submitted by the parties to the main proceedings - which, moreover, are likely to contain differing accounts of the dispute - is not sufficient to safeguard the right of each party under the above provision to submit observations. Consequently, an order for reference which does not describe the factual background to the dispute, its findings of fact, the national legislative context or the precise reasons for which it is uncertain as to the interpretation of Community law and considers it necessary to refer a question to the Court is manifestly inadmissible in that it makes it impossible for the Court to provide a useful interpretation of Community law.