62024CO0149_INF
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 12 December 2024 –United Media Services
(Case C‑149/24)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law – Article 4(3) TEU – Procedural autonomy – Principles of equivalence and effectiveness – Legal certainty – Right to an effective remedy – Final decision of a national court that is incompatible with a subsequent decision of the Court – Decision of a Constitutional Court finding that a provision of national law on the basis of which a judgment was delivered is incompatible with the Constitution of the Member State concerned – Request for revision – Different limitation periods)
1.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Answer admitting of no reasonable doubt – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law – Application of Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure
(Art. 267 TFEU; rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 99)
(see paragraphs 20, 21)
2.
EU law – Direct effect – Individual rights – Safeguarding by the national courts – Legal action – Principle of procedural autonomy – Respect for the principles of equivalence and effectiveness – One-month time limit for bringing an action for revision – Whether permissible – National law laying down a three-month time limit for bringing an action for revision of a judicial decision adopted on the basis of a national provision subsequently declared unconstitutional – Irrelevant
(Art. 4(3) TEU; Art. 267 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 25-29, 31, operative part)
3.
EU law – Direct effect – Individual rights – Safeguarding by the national courts – Legal action – Principle of procedural autonomy – Respect for the principles of equivalence and effectiveness – One-month time limit for bringing an action for revision – Whether permissible – No effect on the possibility of a Member State incurring liability as a result of the decision of a court adjudicating at last instance
(Art. 4(3) TEU; Art. 267 TFEU)
(see paragraph 30)
Operative part
Article 4(3) TEU, read in the light of the principles of equivalence, effectiveness and legal certainty, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which an action for revision of a final judicial decision for infringement of EU law must be brought within a month from notification of that decision, although an action for revision alleging that the final judicial decision at issue was adopted on the basis of a national provision which was subsequently declared unconstitutional by a decision of the Constitutional Court of the Member State concerned may be brought within three months from publication of that decision in the Official Journal of that Member State, provided that the practical consequences of that finding of unconstitutionality flow directly from that decision of the Constitutional Court.