HJ (area of freedom, security and justice - Order) French Text [2019] EUECJ C-680/18_CO (11 April 2019)

HJ (area of freedom, security and justice - Order) French Text [2019] EUECJ C-680/18_CO (11 April 2019)

The reference was manifestly inadmissible because the referring court failed to provide sufficient reasoning as to why interpretation of EU law was necessary, as required by Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure. The court appeared to seek application rather than interpretation of EU law, and did not specify any interpretative doubt.

Citation
[2019] EUECJ C-680/18_CO
Parties
Applicant: HJ; Respondent: II
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
11 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Reference / Order on Admissibility
Outcome
preliminary reference declared manifestly inadmissible
Legal Topics
Preliminary Reference, Maintenance Obligations, Applicable Law, Inadmissibility
European Union Law Private International Law Family Law Preliminary Reference Maintenance Obligations Applicable Law Inadmissibility

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HJ

Applicant

II

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Reference / Order on Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the preliminary reference by the Czech court regarding the applicable law to maintenance obligations between ex-spouses is admissible under Article 267 TFEU and the Court's procedural rules.

Ratio Decidendi

The reference was manifestly inadmissible because the referring court failed to provide sufficient reasoning as to why interpretation of EU law was necessary, as required by Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure. The court appeared to seek application rather than interpretation of EU law, and did not specify any interpretative doubt.

Court Disposition

preliminary reference declared manifestly inadmissible

Orders

  • The preliminary reference from the Obvodní soud pro Prahu 5 (Prague 5 District Court, Czech Republic) is manifestly inadmissible.