Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62015CB0322

    Case C-322/15: Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Google Ireland Limited, Google Italy Srl v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice — Lack of sufficient information concerning the factual and legal context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for a reply to the question referred — Manifest inadmissibility)

    OJ C 454, 5.12.2016, p. 9–9 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.12.2016   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 454/9


    Order of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio — Italy) — Google Ireland Limited, Google Italy Srl v Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni

    (Case C-322/15) (1)

    ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Lack of sufficient information concerning the factual and legal context of the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for a reply to the question referred - Manifest inadmissibility))

    (2016/C 454/18)

    Language of the case: Italian

    Referring court

    Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicants: Google Ireland Limited, Google Italy Srl

    Defendant: Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni

    Intervening parties: Filandolarete Srl, Associazione Confindustria Radio Televisioni, Federazione Italiana Editori Giornali (FIEG)

    Operative part of the order

    The request for a preliminary ruling brought by the Tribunale amministrativo regionale per il Lazio (Regional Administrative Court for Lazio, Italy), by decision of 22 April 2015, is manifestly inadmissible.


    (1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2015.


    Top