Judgment_paragraph 35 · Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille v V and Others (C-125/23)

35In that regard, it should be borne in mind that it is solely for the national court before which the dispute in the main proceedings has been brought to assess the need for a preliminary ruling and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court, which enjoy a presumption of relevance. Thus, the Court is, in principle, bound to give a ruling where the question submitted concerns the interpretation or the validity of a rule of EU law, unless it is quite obvious that the interpretation sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main proceedings or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to that question (judgment of 15 June 2023, Getin Noble Bank (Suspension of the performance of a loan agreement), C‑287/22, EU:C:2023:491, paragraph 26 and the case-law cited).

Association Unedic délégation AGS de Marseille v V and Others (C-125/23)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections