ECJ C-561/19 (Consorzio Italian Management E Catania Multiservizi)

On 6 October 2021, the ECJ issued its decision in the case C-561/19 (Consorzio Italian Management e Catania Multiservizi). This case relates to the provisions governing the EU institutions. This is NOT a VAT Case, but may have consequences on ECJ VAT Cases and national courts as well.

Context: Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Scope of the obligation on national courts or tribunals of last instance to make a reference for a preliminary ruling – Exceptions to that obligation – Criteria – Question on the interpretation of EU law raised by the parties to the national proceedings after the Court has given a preliminary ruling in those proceedings – Failure to state the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Partial inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling

Decision

Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a national court or tribunal against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law must comply with its obligation to bring before the Court of Justice a question concerning the interpretation of EU law that has been raised before it, unless it finds that that question is irrelevant or that the provision of EU law in question has already been interpreted by the Court or that the correct application of EU law is so obvious as to leave no scope for any reasonable doubt.

The existence of such a possibility must be assessed in the light of the characteristic features of EU law, the particular difficulties to which the interpretation of the latter gives rise and the risk of divergences in judicial decisions within the European Union.

Such a court or tribunal cannot be relieved of that obligation merely because it has already made a reference to the Court for a preliminary ruling in the same national proceedings. However, it may refrain from referring to the Court a question for a preliminary ruling on grounds of inadmissibility specific to the procedure before that court or tribunal, subject to compliance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness.

Source Curia

Latest Posts in "European Union"

• Catering vs. Food Delivery: VAT Implications and Compliance Challenges for Businesses
• VAT and Transfer Pricing Adjustments: AG Kokott’s Opinion in Stellantis Portugal (C-603/24) Explained
• EU Parliament Questions Effectiveness and Complexity of Fragmented VAT Rate System Across Member States
• Comments on ECJ Case T-680/25: ECJ to Decide if Free Tooling Provision Is a Taxable Supply of Services for VAT Purposes
• Comments on ECJ case C-603/24: Opinion AG – TP Adjustments for Intra-Group Goods Likely Subject to VAT Compliance