Sulla riformulazione dei criteri CILFIT: le Conclusioni dell'A.G. Bobeknel caso Consorzio Italian Management e Catania Multiservizi

Abstract

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2021 6(2), 955-965 | European Forum Insight of 9 October 2021 | (Table of Contents) I. Premessa. - II. La proposta di riformulazione dei criteri CILFIT. - III. Analisi delle tre condizioni proposte dall'Avvocato Generale Bobek. - IV. Alcune considerazioni critiche. - V. Conclusioni: analogie e dissimilitudini con la procedura consultiva ai sensi del Protocollo n. 16 alla CEDU. | (Abstract) In its opinion of 15th April 2021 in case C-561/19, Consorzio Italian Management and Catania Multiservizi (ECLI:EU:C:2021:291) AG Bobek proposed to revise the CILFIT criteria which famously concern the duty of the National courts of last instance to request a preliminary ruling. After a brief analysis on the controversial relationship between discretion and duty to request a preliminary ruling, this Insight focuses critically on the three cumulative conditions under which, according to AG Bobek, national judges of last instance have a duty to refer and, in particular, on the condition concerning the existence of a general issue of interpretation of EU law. In the last section, the Insight argues that this condition would downgrade the binding effect of a preliminary ruling and would make it similar to the advisory opinions envisaged by Protocol n. 16 to the European Convention of Human Rights.

Keywords

• cjeu
• art. 267 tfeu
• national court of last resort
• cilfit
• obligation to request a preliminary ruling
• advisory opinions under protocol no. 16