62021CO0797_INF
Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 27 May 2024 –Y.Ya. (Secondment of judges)
(Case C-797/21) (
1
)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Rule of law – Effective judicial protection in the fields covered by EU law – Principle of judicial independence – Instruction given by a higher court to a court of first instance to rule on the costs – National provisions relating to the detailed rules for the secondment of judges to a higher court – Interpretation sought by the court of first instance – Necessity of the interpretation sought to enable the referring court to give judgment – None – Manifest inadmissibility)
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Admissibility – Limits – Clearly irrelevant questions and hypothetical questions put in a context not permitting a useful answer – Questions concerning the compliance with EU law of the system for the secondment of judges – Instruction given by a higher court, including seconded judges, to a court of first instance to rule on the costs – Jurisdiction of national courts to assess the lawfulness of the composition of the formation of a higher court determining the case – None – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU)
(see paragraphs 30-34)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Sofiyski rayonen sad (District Court, Sofia, Bulgaria), by decision of 15 December 2021, is manifestly inadmissible.
(
1
)	OJ C 138, 28.3.2022.