When a national court is not sure how a rule of the European Union (EU) should be understood, it can refer a question to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) through the preliminary ruling procedure. But the answer from Luxembourg is only half of the journey: the case returns to the national court, which must apply that answer to the case at hand. How does this happen in practice?
The article "Judicial cooperation in environmental matters: Mapping national courts behaviour in follow-up cases", published in Environmental Law Review (vol. 20, no. 2, 2018, pp. 89–108), answers this question for the courts of the United Kingdom. The authors examined the environmental cases in which British courts had referred questions to the CJEU, from accession in 1973 to January 2017, and how those courts applied the answers.
In all the cases found, British courts showed willingness to cooperate with the CJEU, but to different degrees. The article identifies three trends: full cooperation, fragmented cooperation and presumed cooperation.
Why it matters for Albania. After accession to the EU, Albanian courts will be able to refer questions to the CJEU and will have to apply its answers. Even today, during alignment, Albanian environmental laws follow EU directives, and CJEU case law helps to interpret them. For companies investing in energy, industry or infrastructure, this case law is part of the legal risk that should be assessed now.