44As a preliminary point, it should be recalled that, while, in accordance with settled case-law, questions on the interpretation of EU law referred by a national court in the factual and legislative context which that court is responsible for defining, and the accuracy of which is not a matter for the Court to determine, enjoy a presumption of relevance, such questions are, however, inadmissible if it is quite obvious that the interpretation of EU law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, if the problem is hypothetical, or if the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it (see judgment of 18 June 2024, Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Effect of a decision granting refugee status), (C‑753/22, EU:C:2024:524, paragraph 44 and the case-law cited).