62020CO0521_INF
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 7 April 2022 – J.P.
(Case C‑521/20) (
1
)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Directive 1999/62/EC – Charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures – Tolls – Non-payment – Penalties – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 50 – Ne bis in idem principle – Article 94(c) of the Rules of Procedure – Lack of sufficient information – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility)
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Clearly irrelevant questions and hypothetical questions put in a context not permitting a useful answer – Imposition of an administrative fine for non-payment of the toll for the use of a motorway section by a heavy goods vehicle – Subsequent imposition of other fines for identical offences that occurred on different dates – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 50; European Parliament and Council Directive 1999/62, as amended by Directive 2011/76)
(see paras 17-18, 21-26, operative part)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Landesverwaltungsgericht Oberösterreich (Regional Administrative Court, Upper Austria, Austria), by decision of 15 October 2020, is manifestly inadmissible.
(
1
)	OJ C 35, 1.2.2021.