Odbor kompatibility s právem ES
Úřad vlády ČR
I S A P
Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury
ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů

Číslo (Kód CELEX):
Number (CELEX Code):		61991J0083
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 16 JULY 1992. WIENAND MEILICKE V ADV/ORGA F. A. MEYER AG. REFERENCE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING: LANDGERICHT HANNOVER - GERMANY. COMPANY LAW - DIRECTIVE 77/91/CEE. CASE C-83/91.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1992 PAGES I-4871
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		FREEDOM OF ESTABLISHMENT AND SERVICES;RIGHT OF ESTABLISHMENT;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE PROCEDURE FOR COOPERATION BETWEEN THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND THE NATIONAL COURTS PROVIDED FOR BY ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY, THE NATIONAL COURT, WHICH ALONE HAS DIRECT KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, IS IN THE BEST POSITION TO ASSESS HAVING REGARD TO THE PARTICULAR FEATURES OF THE CASE, WHETHER A PRELIMINARY RULING IS NECESSARY TO ENABLE IT TO GIVE JUDGMENT. CONSEQUENTLY, WHERE THE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY THE NATIONAL COURT CONCERN THE INTERPRETATION OF A PROVISION OF COMMUNITY LAW, THE COURT IS, IN PRINCIPLE, BOUND TO GIVE A RULING. NEVERTHELESS, IT IS A MATTER FOR THE COURT OF JUSTICE, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT HAS JURISDICTION, TO EXAMINE THE CONDITIONS IN WHICH THE CASE HAS BEEN REFERRED TO IT. THE SPIRIT OF COOPERATION WHICH MUST PREVAIL IN THE PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE REQUIRES THE NATIONAL COURT TO HAVE REGARD TO THE FUNCTION ENTRUSTED TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE, WHICH IS TO ASSIST IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN THE MEMBER STATES AND NOT TO DELIVER ADVISORY OPINIO
NS ON GENERAL OR HYPOTHETICAL QUESTIONS.

2. THE NEED TO PROVIDE AN INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW WHICH WILL BE OF USE TO THE NATIONAL COURT MAKES IT ESSENTIAL TO DEFINE THE LEGAL CONTEXT IN WHICH THE INTERPRETATION REQUESTED SHOULD BE PLACED. ACCORDINGLY, IT MAY BE CONVENIENT, IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, FOR THE FACTS OF THE CASE TO BE ESTABLISHED AND FOR QUESTIONS OF PURELY NATIONAL LAW TO BE SETTLED AT THE TIME THE REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE, SO AS TO ENABLE THE LATTER TO TAKE COGNIZANCE OF ALL THE FEATURES OF FACT AND OF LAW WHICH MAY BE RELEVANT TO THE INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW WHICH IT IS CALLED UPON TO GIVE.

3. THE COURT WOULD BE EXCEEDING THE LIMITS OF THE FUNCTION ENTRUSTED TO IT IF IT DECIDED TO GIVE A RULING ON A HYPOTHETICAL PROBLEM WITHOUT HAVING BEFORE IT THE MATTERS OF FACT OR LAW NECESSARY TO GIVE A USEFUL ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO IT.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):