Judgment_paragraph 40 · Confédération paysanne v Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Souveraineté alimentaire and Ministre de l'Économie, des Finances et de la Souveraineté industrielle et numérique (C-399/22)

40According to settled case-law, in the procedure laid down by Article 267 TFEU providing for cooperation between national courts and the Court of Justice, it is for the latter to provide the national court with an answer which will be of use to it and enable it to decide the case before it. To that end, the Court should, where necessary, reformulate the questions referred to it. The Court may also find it necessary to consider provisions of EU law which the national court has not referred to in its questions. The fact that a national court has, formally speaking, worded a question referred for a preliminary ruling with reference to certain provisions of EU law does not prevent the Court from providing the national court with all the points of interpretation which may be of assistance in adjudicating on the case pending before it, whether or not that court has referred to them in its questions. In that regard, it is for the Court to extract from all the information provided by the national court, in particular from the grounds of the decision referring the questions, the points of EU law which require interpretation, having regard to the subject matter of the dispute (judgment of 22 December 2022, Ministre de la Transition écologique and Premier ministre (Liability of the State for air pollution), C‑61/21, EU:C:2022:1015, paragraph 34 and the case-law cited).

Confédération paysanne v Ministre de l’Agriculture et de la Souveraineté alimentaire and Ministre de l'Économie, des Finances et de la Souveraineté industrielle et numérique (C-399/22)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections