Furthermore,
although it is true that the procedure laid down in Article 267 TFEU is an instrument for cooperation between the Court of Justice and the national courts, by means of which the former provides the latter with the points of
interpretation of EU law necessary in order for them to decide the disputes before them, the fact remains that when there is no
judicial remedy under national law against the decision of a court or tribunal of a Member State, that court or tribunal is, in principle, obliged to bring the matter before the Court of Justice under the third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU where a question relating to the
interpretation of EU law is raised before it...
Although President Zhou Qiang and Executive Vice President Shen Deyong speak of the benefits of
judicial transparency, it seems the benefits of public participation in
judicial interpretation drafting / rule - making have yet to be fully realized.
Although evidentiary submissions may help answer it, the question is, like the question whether racial or sex - based classifications communicate an invidious message, in large part a legal question to be answered on the basis of
judicial interpretation of social facts.»