CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW AND THE PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE … CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW AND THE PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE: COMMENTARY ON THE CCB DECISION OF THE CZECH CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Václav Stehlík Abstract: The article analyses the decision of the Czech Constitutional Court II. ÚS 3432/17 in CCB case in which the court limited its review of the obligation of ordinary courts to initiate the preliminary ruling procedure to the EU Court of Justice. The Constitutional Court decided to interpret the CILFIT criteria loosely. Consequently, the breach of the obligation to initiate the preliminary ruling procedure under art. 267 TFEUwill infringe the Czech constitutional rules only in limited circumstances. Thus, the Czech Constitutional Court decreased the level of constitutional protection of private parties against the violation of the obligation to refer questions to the EU Court of Justice. Resumé: Článek analyzuje rozhodnutí Ústavního soudu ČR II. ÚS 3432/17 ve věci CCB, ve kterém Soud omezil přezkum povinnosti obecných soudů zahájit řízení o předběžné otázce na Soudní dvůr EU. Ústavní soud rozhodl o volném výkladu kritérií CILFIT. Porušení povinnosti zahájit řízení o předběžné otázce podle čl. 267 SFEU poruší česká ústavní pravidla pouze za omezených okolností. Český Ústavní soud tak snížil úroveň ústavní ochrany soukromých stran proti porušení povinnosti klást Soudnímu dvoru EU otázky. Key words: Preliminary ruling procedure, CILFIT, Czech Constitutional Court, Court of Justice of the European Union About the Author : Václav Stehlík is an associate professor of EU law and Jean Monnet Chairholder in EU law at the Faculty of Law, Palacký University in Olomouc, e-mail: vaclav.stehlik@upol.cz. 1. Introductory remarks The preliminary ruling procedure is a cornerstone in the construction of the EU law. It interconnects the national judicial system with the EU level and is based on the cooperation of national courts and the Court of Justice of the European Union (further referred as “CJEU”). The rationale justifying the existence of the procedure is the proper and uniform application of the EU law in all Member States. 1 This procedure has become a key element in formulating the main characteristics of the EU law such as the direct and indirect effect of the EU law in national law, its precedence over national law including the constitutional law or a far reaching development of internal market freedoms and EU citizenship rights. 2 Thus, the proper use of this procedure is a sensitive issue both for the national courts deciding the case as well as the CJEU guarding the full respect of the EU law in the national 1 See for example SCHERMERS, Henry, WAELBROECK, Denis. Judicial Protection in the European Union . Kluwer Law International, 2001, p. 227. 2 For complex analysis of the preliminary ruling procedure see, f.e. Broberg, Morten, Fenger, Niels. Preliminary reference to the European Court of Justice . 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014; in the Czech literature especially BOBEK, Michal, KOMÁREK, Jan, PASSER, Jan, GILLIS, Mark. Předběžná otázka v komunitárním právu . Praha: Linde, 2005 or STEHLÍK, Václav. Řízení o předběžné otázce v komunitárním právu . UP Olomouc 2006.

117