Courts emphasize the importance of providing reasons and of respecting the principle of legitimate expectations
The CJEU has reiterated that courts must provide adequate reasons for deciding not to refer a question for a preliminary ruling, even where the parties have not requested this; and the Supreme Court has strengthened the principle of legitimate expectations, by recalling that the application of benefits to customs clearance cannot be denied where the certificates of origin supporting the importation have expired, provided that the customs authorities were able to verify them within the prescribed period.
In a recent judgment (March 24, 2026, case C-767/23), the CJEU underlined the importance of the preliminary ruling procedure, a cornerstone of the European Union’s judicial system, recalling that courts whose decisions are not subject to further appeal must refer a question for a preliminary ruling where they are required to rule on issues relating to the interpretation or validity of EU law.
As a safeguard for that obligation, the CJEU has established that, where the competent court considers that there is no need to make a reference for a preliminary ruling, it must state the specific reasons for that decision. In particular, it must indicate which of the so‑called “Cilfit exceptions” apply. Those exceptions are: (i) the irrelevance of the question, (ii) the fact that the provision of EU law in question has already been interpreted by the CJEU, and (iii) the fact that the correct interpretation of that law is so obvious as to leave no scope for reasonable doubt. This obligation to state reasons applies even where none of the parties has expressly requested a reference for preliminary ruling, if EU law has been invoked.
We analyzed this judgment in depth and its importance for cassation appeals in Spain in our Garrigues Tax Blog post dated April 28, 2026.
On a separate note, the Supreme Court has reiterated the importance of the tax authorities respecting the principle of legitimate expectations. Specifically, in a judgment of March 24, 2026, the Supreme Court held that, although the customs authorities are not under obligation to accept the certificates of origin documenting imports after the two-year period established in the law has expired, they must do so if during that period, they have had the opportunity to review and accept those certificates. We analyzed this judgment and its practical implications beyond a customs context in our Garrigues Tax Blog post dated May 12, 2026.
Contact
