ECJ According to article 177 of the Treaty it is for the national court and not the parties to the main action to bring a matter before the court of justice.
Since the power to formulate the questions to be referred is vested in the national court alone the parties cannot alter the wording of those questions.
Under the system instituted by regulation no 19 of the council, that is, up to and including 30 june 1967, the member states were free to decide whether or not to grant refunds on exports of cereals to third countries. Where a member state exercised this power, the question of determining the period within which the refunds were to be paid was a matter for national law alone.
In so far as the system instituted by regulation no 120/67/eec of the council concerning cereals differs from that resulting from regulation no 19, the new rules relate solely to commercial transactions effected after 30 June 1967.
Citations:
R-5/72, [1972] EUECJ R-5/72, (1973) 12 CMLR 335
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – HP Bulmer Ltd and Another v J Bollinger Sa and others CA 22-May-1974
Necessity for Reference to ECJ
Lord Denning said that the test for whether a question should be referred to the European Court of Justice is one of necessity, not desirability or convenience. There are cases where the point, if decided one way, would shorten the trial greatly. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
European
Updated: 21 June 2022; Ref: scu.214167