De ce dorința instanței de a adresa CJUE o întrebare preliminară nu constituie un caz de antepronunțare (notă critică la o încheiere a Înaltei Curți de Casație și Justiție)
Why the Court's Wish to Refer a Preliminary Question to the CJEU Does Not Constitute a Case of Prejudgment (Critical Note on a Ruling of the High Court of Cassation and Justice)

Summary/Abstract: This article analyzes a ruling by the High Court of Cassation and Justice (ICCJ) in which a judicial panel was recused due to their intention to refer a preliminary question to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The author argues that this decision flagrantly contradicts EU law, specifically Article 267 TFEU, which guarantees national courts the discretion to initiate this judicial dialogue without interference. It is posited that the wish to refer a question to the CJEU is a procedural necessity and an act of cooperation, not a case of prejudgment or evidence of partiality under national and ECHR standards. Although the ICCJ justified the recusal based on the late stage at which the referral was discussed, claiming it created reasonable suspicion for the defendant, the author demonstrates that the cited ECHR case law is inapplicable. The conclusion warns that validating this practice endangers judicial independence and the preliminary ruling mechanism.

• Details
• Contents