NB v Kutxabank SA (C-300/23)

Judgment of 12 Dec 2024

law://eu/cjeu/2023/c-300-23/para_59@2026-11-15

59As a preliminary point, it must be noted, first, that it is solely for the national court before which the dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine, in the light of the particular circumstances of the case, both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court, which enjoy a presumption of relevance. Therefore, in so far as a question referred concerns the interpretation or validity of a rule of EU law, the Court is, in principle, required to give a ruling, unless it is quite obvious that the interpretation sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action, it is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the question submitted to it (judgment of 21 December 2021, Trapeza Peiraios, C‑243/20, EU:C:2021:1045, paragraph 25 and the case-law cited). Second, in accordance with Article 94(a) and (c) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, an order for reference must contain ‘a summary’ of the facts and a ‘statement’ of the reasons for the reference.

NB v Kutxabank SA (C-300/23)

History · 1 version

Key facts

Connections