## Facts

- The case addressed the interpretation of Directive 2003/88/EC concerning the organization of working time.
- The Supreme Court of Justice of Portugal faced uncertainty regarding the correct application of this Directive.
- Despite the uncertainty, the Supreme Court chose not to refer the matter to the CJEU, relying instead on previous CJEU case law which it considered to have resolved the issue.
- This raised the issue of whether the Portuguese Supreme Court’s refusal to refer complied with its obligations under Article 267 TFEU.

## Issues

1. Whether a national court of last instance must refer questions to the CJEU when the interpretation of EU law is uncertain.
2. Whether the Portuguese Supreme Court appropriately relied on the acte clair doctrine to avoid referring the question.
3. What legal consequences arise when a court of last instance fails to refer under Article 267 TFEU.

## Decision

- The CJEU confirmed that courts of last instance are required to refer questions to the CJEU when uncertainty exists about EU law’s interpretation.
- The acte clair exception was held to be strictly limited to situations where there is no reasonable doubt, including among national courts and the CJEU.
- Overreliance on the acte clair doctrine and failure to refer may constitute a breach of EU law and may trigger state liability.
- Such failures were found to risk inconsistent application of EU law and the denial of rights under EU law.

## Legal Principles

- Article 4(3) TEU requires Member States and their courts to cooperate sincerely and fulfill EU obligations in good faith.
- Article 267 TFEU binds courts of final instance to refer when faced with unclear EU law.
- The acte clair doctrine is narrowly confined, only applying where there is an absolute absence of reasonable doubt among all relevant courts.
- A state can be held liable if its courts fail to make a required reference, threatening the uniform and effective application of EU law.

## Conclusion

The Court of Justice of the European Union clarified that national courts of last instance must refer questions on unclear EU law, permitting the acte clair exception only in rare cases, and established that failure to do so may result in state liability to safeguard the uniform interpretation and effectiveness of EU law.

Ferreira da Silva e Brito v Estado português (Case C-160/14), ECLI:EU:C:2015:565