Sentences with phrase «acte clair»

If UKSC were to accept the above analysis and consider that the «constitutional requirements» here are not acte clair, it would be bound - irrespective of parties» submissions on the point - to make a reference anyway.

It goes without saying that even though Ferreira de Silva case could be seen as a more lenient approach towards the relaxing of the acte clair doctrine [8] the CJEU will always strive for uniform and correct interpretation of EU law in order to avoid divergences in judicial decisions as well as different and conflicting application of EU law.

The acte clair doctrine, first articulated in Cilfit (C - 283 / 81), states that in accordance with article 267 TFEU, a national court against whose judgment there is no higher appeal must refer a question to the ECJ when a question on the interpretation of EU law arises, unless the answer is «so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt».

It then started a preliminary reference to ask whether it had to await the outcome of the pending questions of the lower court, or that it could dismiss the question as an acte clair.

For this reason, the CJEU decided that the acte clair doctrine does not hold and the court of last instance (Portuguese Supreme Court) was under an obligation to refer a question.

Read in tandem, the cases shine an interesting light on the acte clair doctrine, which determines when courts of last instance are freed from their obligation to refer a question to the ECJ.

X and Van Dijk demonstrates that courts have a certain freedom to assess this, and that a mere contradictory judgment of a lower court does not preclude the finding of an acte clair.

[8] Elisabeth Ruiz Cairo,» Joined cases C - 72 / 14 and C - 197 / 14 X and case C - 160 / 14 Ferreira da Silva: is the ECJ reversing its position on the acte clair doctrine?»

In conclusion, the present Decision, full of controversial elements, does not seem to fall under the doctrine of acte clair at all.

It is worth noting that the judge ruled out the possibility of a preliminary reference to the CJEU, on the grounds that he is not obliged to do so, applying to the doctrine of the acte clair (see C - 283 / 81 CiLFIT).

What is striking is that, although in theory the formulation of the acte clair doctrine by the ECJ is extremely strict, in practice the Court has been very flexible when applying the different criteria.

In two recent preliminary rulings, the ECJ elaborated on the applicability of the acte clair doctrine.

Although Article 267 TFEU established a duty for national supreme courts to refer to the ECJ, the acte clair doctrine, mentioned for the first time in Cilfit, is an exception to this general rule.

Nevertheless, delivering different preliminary rulings on the same day can also be a signal to make it clear that, although the Court is not willing to abandon its cooperative strategy towards national courts, it is ready to take some steps to avoid the abusive use of the acte clair doctrine that many national courts were making and which is contrary to the uniformity of EU law that the ECJ pursues through the preliminary ruling mechanism.

However, as AG Wahl notes in his opinion in X, adopting a very narrow approach to the conditions attached to the acte clair doctrine, «would seem in contradiction both with reality and with the spirit of cooperation which characterises the relationship between the Court of Justice and the national (supreme) courts» (paragraph 64).

The Court establishes that «that fact alone does not preclude the supreme court of a Member State from concluding -LRB-...) that the case before it involves an «acte clair» (paragraph 60).

The Court is only confirming its flexible approach towards the acte clair doctrine and reaffirming its will to keep a cooperative relationship with national supreme courts.

Not exact matches

Should a Member States «court of last instance nonetheless submit a question within the scope of EU law to the ECtHR without being entitled to do so under the acte - clair - doctrine, proceedings for infringement of the Treaties could be engaged against that Member State based on Art. 258 f. TFEU.