This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61997CO0128
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 April 1998. # Criminal proceedings against Italia Testa and Mario Modesti, intervener: Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (SIAE). # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Pretura circondariale di Roma - Italy. # Reference for a preliminary ruling - Inadmissibility. # Joined cases C-128/97 and C-137/97.
Определение на Съда (шести състав) от 30 април 1998 г.
Наказателно производство срещу Italia Testa и Mario Modesti, в присъствието на Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (SIAE).
Искане за преюдициално заключение: Pretura circondariale di Roma - Италия.
недопустимост.
Съединени дела C-128/97 и C-137/97.
Определение на Съда (шести състав) от 30 април 1998 г.
Наказателно производство срещу Italia Testa и Mario Modesti, в присъствието на Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (SIAE).
Искане за преюдициално заключение: Pretura circondariale di Roma - Италия.
недопустимост.
Съединени дела C-128/97 и C-137/97.
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:1998:187
- Date of document:
- 30/04/1998
- Date lodged:
- 28/03/1997
- Author:
- Съд
- Country or organisation from which the request originates:
- Итaлия
- Form:
- Определение
- Additional information:
- обединен случай ? 61997CO0137
- Authentic language:
- италиански
- Type of procedure:
- Иск за предварително заключение - недопустим
- Applicant:
- НЕОКОНЧАТЕЛНИ ДАННИ
- Defendant:
- НЕОКОНЧАТЕЛНИ ДАННИ
- Judge-Rapporteur:
- Kapteyn
- Advocate General:
- Cosmas
- National court:
-
** AFFAIRE 137/1997 **
*A9* Pretura circondariale di Roma, Sezione distaccata di Tivoli, ordinanza del 05/02/1997 (RG 211/96)
*A9* Pretura circondariale di Roma, Sezione distaccata di Tivoli, ordinanza del 19/02/1997
- Treaty:
- Договор за създаване на Европейската икономическа общност
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Instruments cited in case law:
-
- 11957E/PRO/CJ/20: N 6
- 11992E030: N 10 14
- 11992E036: N 10 14
- 11992E085: N 10 11 14
- 11992E086: N 10 11 14
- 61981CJ0141-N06: N 6
- 61990CJ0320-N06: N 5
- 61992CO0157-N04: N 5
- 61993CO0428-N15: N 17
- 61993CO0458-N12: N 5
- 61993CO0458-N13: N 6
- 61994CO0167-N08: N 5
- 61994CO0167-N10: N 6
- 61995CO0307-N06: N 5
- 61995CO0307-N08: N 6
- 61996CJ0291-N16: N 17
- 61996CO0002-N04: N 5
- 61996CO0002-N05: N 6
- 61996CO0101: N 3
- 61996CO0191: N 3
- Notes relating to the decision:
-
- Ritleng, D.: Europe 1998 Juin Comm. nº 186 p.7-8
- Subject matter:
- Case law directory code:
-
61997O0128
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 30 April 1998. - Criminal proceedings against Italia Testa and Mario Modesti, intervener: Società Italiana degli Autori ed Editori (SIAE). - Reference for a preliminary ruling: Pretura circondariale di Roma - Italy. - Reference for a preliminary ruling - Inadmissibility. - Joined cases C-128/97 and C-137/97.
European Court reports 1998 Page I-02181
Keywords
Preliminary rulings - Admissibility - Questions raised without sufficient information regarding the factual and legislative context - Questions raised in a context precluding a useful reply
(EC Treaty, Art. 177; EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 20)
Summary
In order to reach an interpretation of Community law which will be of use to the national court, it is essential that the national court define the factual and legislative context of the questions it is asking or, at the very least, explain the factual circumstances on which those questions are based.
In that respect the information provided and the questions raised in orders for reference must not only be such as to enable the Court usefully to reply but must also give the Governments of the Member States and interested parties the opportunity to submit observations pursuant to Article 20 of the Statute of the Court.
It is the Court's duty to ensure that the opportunity to submit observations is safeguarded, bearing in mind that, by virtue of the abovementioned provision, only the orders for reference are notified to the interested parties.
A request by a national court which fails to give sufficient details of the national legislative context of the questions which it has put to the Court and to state the precise reasons which prompted it to examine the compatibility with Community law of certain provisions of national law or the reasons why it considers an answer to those questions to be necessary for the resolution of the dispute before it is consequently manifestly inadmissible in so far as it does not enable the Court to give a useful interpretation of Community law.
