{"id":2108,"date":"2021-09-25T19:50:55","date_gmt":"2021-09-25T17:50:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/?p=2108"},"modified":"2022-02-11T21:43:54","modified_gmt":"2022-02-11T20:43:54","slug":"the-echr-recalls-its-case-law-on-the-obligation-for-courts-to-give-reasons-when-dismissing-a-request-for-a-preliminary-ruling-by-the-cjeu-decision-in-the-case-of-quintanel-v-france","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/the-echr-recalls-its-case-law-on-the-obligation-for-courts-to-give-reasons-when-dismissing-a-request-for-a-preliminary-ruling-by-the-cjeu-decision-in-the-case-of-quintanel-v-france\/","title":{"rendered":"The ECHR recalls its case-law on the obligation for courts to give reasons when dismissing a request for a preliminary ruling by the CJEU: decision in the case of Quintanel v. France"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>By a decision in the case of <em>Josette Quintanel v. France and 14 other applications<\/em> (no. 12528\/17 et seq., 17.6.2021) the ECHR declared inadmissible 15 applications against France which, <em>inter alia<\/em>, complained about the alleged failure by several administrative courts to <strong>properly motivate<\/strong> their <strong>refusal to grant the applicants&#8217; requests <\/strong>that some EU law issues be referred to the CJEU for a <strong>preliminary ruling<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The ECHR first recalled that only the national courts which, under <strong>Art. 267 TFEU<\/strong>, are bound to turn to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling, i. e. <strong>those courts against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law<\/strong>, are also under an <strong>obligation, flowing from Art. 6 of the Convention, to give reasons<\/strong> when dismissing a request by a party to the domestic proceedings for an EU law issue to be submitted to the CJEU (\u00a7 89). <\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Consequently, in the present case only the <em><strong>Conseil d&#8217;Etat<\/strong> <\/em>(Supreme Administrative Court) was bound to give reasons for its refusal to refer the case to the CJEU, which it had actually not done. However, the ECHR noted that a <strong>lower administrative court acting in the same case had previously well explained<\/strong> that in view of relevant CJEU case-law on the issue at hand such a referral was not required under Art. 267 TFEU. This being so, the ECHR considered that having regard to the <strong>proceedings as a whole<\/strong>, an answer compliant with Art. 6 of the Convention had been given to the applicant who had therefore been <strong>enabled to understand the reasons<\/strong> underlying the contested dismissal (\u00a7 90). Consequently, Art. 6 had not been breached.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-file\"><a href=\"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/QUINTANEL-ET-AUTRES-c.-FRANCE.pdf\">QUINTANEL-ET-AUTRES-c.-FRANCE<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/QUINTANEL-ET-AUTRES-c.-FRANCE.pdf\" class=\"wp-block-file__button\" download>Download PDF (only in French)<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>By a decision in the case of Josette Quintanel v. France and 14 other applications (no. 12528\/17 et seq., 17.6.2021) the ECHR declared inadmissible 15 applications against France which, inter alia, complained about the alleged failure by several administrative courts to properly motivate their refusal to grant the applicants&#8217; requests that some EU law issues [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-european-court-of-human-rights","category-recent-case-law"],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"3.0.2","language":"fr","enabled_languages":["en","de","fr"],"languages":{"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"de":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false},"fr":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2108"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2118,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2108\/revisions\/2118"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}