The Preliminary Ruling Procedure:
A Cornerstone of Intergovernmental Coordination in the European Union
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61801/Arsaequi.2024.257Keywords:
EU law, coordination, preliminary ruling, CJEU, TFEU, constitutional lawAbstract
The preliminary ruling procedure, enshrined in Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), stands as a fundamental mechanism of judicial cooperation and legal integration. While seemingly a technical legal tool, it is, in practice, the primary engine of a unique legal order that navigates and resolves the inherent tensions between the European Union's supranational ambitions and the national sovereignty of its Member States. This report argues that the procedure is not merely a method for interpreting European Union (EU) law; it is a collaborative dialogue between the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and national courts, which has been instrumental in shaping the EU's constitutional architecture. Through a series of landmark cases, the preliminary ruling procedure has operationalized foundational doctrines such as direct effect and the supremacy of EU law, thereby empowering citizens and ensuring the uniform application of EU legislation across the Union. Despite persistent challenges related to judicial discretion and the complexities of multilevel governance, the procedure's enduring effectiveness, as demonstrated by its high volume of cases and recent institutional reforms, confirms its central role as the "jewel in the crown" of the EU legal system.
References
Books
Alter KJ, Establishing the Supremacy of European Law: The Making of an International Rule of Law in Europe (OUP 2001)
Broberg M and Fenger N, Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice (2nd edn, OUP 2014)
Craig P and de Búrca G, EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (6th edn, OUP 2015)
Journal articles
Bobek M, ‘Preliminary rulings before the General Court: What judicial architecture for the European Union?’ (2023) 60(6) Common Market Law Review 1515-1550 https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2023115
Broberg M, ‘If you love somebody set them free: on the Court of Justice’s revision of the acte clair doctrine’ (2022) 59(3) Common Market Law Review 711-738 https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2022050
Craig P, ‘Preliminary rulings and acte clair: National courts, Advocate General and CJEU’ (2022) 9(2) Journal of International and Comparative Law 45-64
Dyevre A, Glavina M and Atanasov A, ‘Who refers most? Institutional incentives and judicial participation in the preliminary ruling system’ (2019) 27(6) Journal of European Public Policy 912-930 https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1629991
Hornuf L and Voigt S, ‘Analyzing preliminary references as the powerbase of the European Court of Justice’ (2015) 39(2) European Journal of Law and Economics 287-311
Jacobs FG, ‘Judicial Dialogue and the Cross-Fertilization of Legal Systems: The European Court of Justice’ (2003) 38(3) Texas International Law Journal 547
Leijon K, ‘National courts and preliminary references: Supporting legal integration, protecting national autono-my or balancing conflicting demands?’ (2021) 44(3) West European Politics 510-530 https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2020.1738113
Leijon K and Glavina M, ‘Why passive? Exploring national judges’ motives for not requesting preliminary rulings’ (2022) 29(2) European Law Journal 263-285 https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221091768
Lenz CO, ‘The Role and Mechanism of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure’ (1994) 18(2) Fordham International Law Journal 389-409
Limantė A, ‘Recent Developments in the Acte Clair Case Law of the EU Court of Justice: Towards a more Flexible Approach’ (2016) 24(4) Journal of Common Market Studies 1384-1397 https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12434
Passalacqua V and Costamagna F, ‘The Law and Facts of the Preliminary Reference Procedure: A Critical As-sessment of the EU Court of Justice’s Source of Knowledge’ (2023) 2(2) European Law Open 322-344 https://doi.org/10.1017/elo.2023.26
Petrić D, ‘How to Make a Unicorn or “There Never Was an ‘Acte Clair’ in EU Law”: Some Remarks About Case C-561/19 Consorzio Italian Management’ (2021) 17(1) Croatian Yearbook of European Law and Policy 307-328 https://doi.org/10.3935/cyelp.17.2021.462
Petrić D, ‘The Preliminary Ruling Procedure 2.0’ (2023) 8(1) European Papers 25-42 https://doi.org/10.15166/2499-8249/632
Spiermann O, ‘The Other Side of the Story: An Unpopular Essay on the Making of the European Community Legal Order’ (1999) 10(4) European Journal of International Law 763-789 https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/10.4.763
Weiler JHH, ‘Van Gend en Loos: The individual as subject and object and the dilemma of European legitimacy’ (2014) 12(1) International Journal of Constitutional Law 94-103 https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mou011
Treaties and declarations
Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (adopted 18 April 1951, entered into force 23 July 1952, expired 23 July 2002) 261 UNTS 140
Schuman Declaration (9 May 1950) https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/schuman-declaration/
Online sources
Krommendijk J, ‘CILFIT in Strasbourg: The acte clair doctrine and the duty to state reasons’ (14 March 2024) Verfassungsblog https://verfassungsblog.de/cilfit-in-strasbourg/
CJEU, ‘Statistics of Judicial Activity’ (2024) https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/Jo2_7032/en/
Case law
Case 26/62 NV Algemene Transport- en Expeditie Onderneming van Gend en Loos v Netherlands Inland Reve-nue Administration [1963] ECR 1, ECLI:EU:C:1963:1
Case 6/64 Flaminio Costa v ENEL [1964] ECR 585, ECLI:EU:C:1964:66
Case 283/81 CILFIT v Ministry of Health [1982] ECR 3415
Joined Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90 Francovich and Bonifaci v Italy [1991] ECR I-5357, ECLI:EU:C:1991:428
Case C-224/01 Köbler v Austria, ECLI:EU:C:2003:513 (30 September 2003)
Case C-284/16 Slovak Republic v Achmea B.V., ECLI:EU:C:2018:158 (6 March 2018)
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Editura Solomon.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
.png)
.png)
