Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 February 2026 – PRVO PLINARSKO DRUŠTVO
(Case C‑403/24)
( Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Article 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU – Effective judicial protection in matters covered by EU law – Independence of judges – Court established in advance by law – Fair trial – National legislation providing for the establishment of a ‘registration judge’ in courts of second instance who, in practice, has the power to suspend the delivery of a judgment – Incompatibility of that practice – Final nature of the judgment concerned – Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 – Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 – Irrelevance of the interpretation sought – Hypothetical question – Manifest inadmissibility )
1.      Member States – Obligations – Provision of remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection – Mechanism internal to a national court which makes the sending of a judicial decision to the parties subject to the content of the decision being approved by a judge not forming part of the judicial panel – Not permissible
(Art. 19(1), second subpara., TEU)
(see paragraphs 20, 21)
2.      Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Admissibility – Limits – Clearly irrelevant questions and hypothetical questions put in a context not permitting a useful answer – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 53(2))
(see paragraph 23, operative part)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Visoki trgovački sud (High Commercial Court, Croatia) by order of 31 May 2024 is manifestly inadmissible.