- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-3/16: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 15 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Brussel — Belgium) — Lucio Cesare Aquino v Belgische Staat (Reference for a preliminary ruling — EU law — Rights conferred on individuals — Infringement by a court — Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Reference to the Court — National court of last instance)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62016CA0003
62016CA0003
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C 151/10
(Case C-3/16) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - EU law - Rights conferred on individuals - Infringement by a court - Questions referred for a preliminary ruling - Reference to the Court - National court of last instance))
(2017/C 151/14)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Lucio Cesare Aquino
Defendant: Belgische Staat
Operative part of the judgment
1.The third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a court against whose decisions there is a judicial remedy under national law may not be regarded as a court adjudicating at last instance, where an appeal on a point of law against a decision of that court is not examined because of discontinuance by the appellant.
2.There is no need to answer Question 2.
3.The third paragraph of Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a court adjudicating at last instance may decline to refer a question to the Court for a preliminary ruling where an appeal on a point of law is dismissed on grounds of inadmissibility specific to the procedure before that court, subject to compliance with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness.
(<span class="note">1</span>) OJ C 136, 18.4.2016.