Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62021CJ0261

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 July 2022.
F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Others v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato.
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Obligation on Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law – Article 267 TFEU – Obligation on the referring court to give full effect to the interpretation of EU law provided by the Court of Justice – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Access to an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Judgment of a national court of last instance after a preliminary ruling by the Court – Alleged non-conformity of that judgment with the interpretation of EU law provided by the Court – National legislation preventing the bringing of an action for revision of that judgment.
Case C-261/21.

Court reports – general

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2022:534

Case C‑261/21

F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Others

v

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato)

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 7 July 2022

(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Obligation on Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law – Article 267 TFEU – Obligation on the referring court to give full effect to the interpretation of EU law provided by the Court of Justice – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Access to an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Judgment of a national court of last instance after a preliminary ruling by the Court – Alleged non-conformity of that judgment with the interpretation of EU law provided by the Court – National legislation preventing the bringing of an action for revision of that judgment)

  1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Identification of the relevant aspects of EU law – Reformulation of the questions

    (Art. 267 TFEU)

    (see paragraphs 38-42)

  2. Member States – Obligations – Provision of remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection – Principle of procedural autonomy – No possibility of bringing an action for revision of a judgment given by a national supreme court of last instance after a preliminary ruling by the Court – Whether permissible – Conditions

    (Arts 4(3) and 19(1), second subpara., TEU; Art. 267 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47)

    (see paragraphs 43-59, operative part)

See the text of the decision.

Top