{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-11-02","fingerprint":"ewai:se:8c259e","proof":"sha256:c0b21e07f7a13c4f3039f3b71b8e6e066b100a864fb8d21ef4a32ba112515416","jurisdiction":"se","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","object_type":"edge","object_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16","schema_version":"1","schema":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/schemas/edge","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16","judgment":{"id":"eu:c-304-16","text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=eu:c-304-16"},"siblings":{"risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/risk/eu:c-304-16","relation":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/relation/eu:c-304-16","change":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/change/eu:c-304-16","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/agent/eu:c-304-16","provenance":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/provenance/eu:c-304-16","status":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/status/eu:c-304-16","precedent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-304-16","element":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/element/eu:c-304-16","decision":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/decision/eu:c-304-16","weight":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/weight/eu:c-304-16","conflict":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/conflict/eu:c-304-16","citation_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/citation_graph/eu:c-304-16"},"source":"NovaCopilot","precedent_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/precedent-graph/eu:c-304-16","item":{"judgment":"eu:c-304-16","outgoing":[{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~follows~c-42-07","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-42/07","id":"eu:c-42-07","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-42-07"},"paragraph_ids":["para_208"],"excerpt":"In that regard, it is sufficient that both the subject matter of the dispute in the main proceedings and the main issues raised for the EU legal order may be understood from the request for a preliminary ruling in order to enable the Member States and other interested parties to submit their observa","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"034df3a2a7ee0239587d0b04ff1c2c8a2616090eac75b2de5dba5e41bffb0575"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~follows~c-477-14","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-477/14","id":"eu:c-477-14","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-477-14"},"paragraph_ids":["para_202","para_214","para_216","para_222","para_224"],"excerpt":"As regards, further, whether the referring court has adequately set out the reasons why it is uncertain as to the interpretation and validity of the provisions at issue in the main proceedings, it does follow from the spirit of cooperation which must prevail in the operation of the preliminary refer","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"6ca60f3e030b0a6c5447e43a3f432a0092bb5c9cc22caec47ac00bd95f04c372"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~follows~c-616-15","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-616/15","id":"eu:c-616-15","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-616-15"},"paragraph_ids":["para_245"],"excerpt":"In that regard, it must be recalled that, in accordance with the Court’s settled case-law, in interpreting a provision of EU law it is necessary to consider not only its wording but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (judgment of 21 Septem","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"c2e68005ed7f2326bf59a819c1f726fa5654dfa0665416e91a1855439de430fd"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~follows~c-62-14","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-62/14","id":"eu:c-62-14","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-62-14"},"paragraph_ids":["para_198","para_200","para_204","para_224","para_289","para_311"],"excerpt":"It must be recalled that, according to the Court’s settled case-law, the principle of proportionality requires that acts of the EU institutions should be appropriate for attaining the legitimate objectives pursued by the legislation at issue and should not go beyond what is necessary in order to ach","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"61d56aa76914b445f5a04f830cb793e8081cd42aefb382893b203ff808e8d3ea"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-26-15","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-26/15","id":null,"url":null},"paragraph_ids":["para_291"],"excerpt":"Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly held that if an act of general application discloses the essential objective pursued by the institution, it would be excessive to require a specific statement of reasons for the various technical choices made (judgment of 3 March 2016, Spain v Commission, C-26/1","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"17ddba3552ef4e874887f07e09b873ecfc2d0a8a44c6e1ba4359baeab31a24ba"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-275-07","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-275/07","id":"eu:c-275-07","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-275-07"},"paragraph_ids":["para_257"],"excerpt":"If, however, the EU legislature had wished to restrict the scope of Article 1(5), so that that would be the case, it could have made express provision to that effect (see, by analogy, judgment of 19 March 2009, Commission v Italy, C-275/07 , EU:C:2009:169 , paragraph 99 ).","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"1d49829c8d293305903ca70bd8a95656711b8a2b6db38949b174e97d9d9b58c1"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-308-06","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-308/06","id":"eu:c-308-06","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-308-06"},"paragraph_ids":["para_222"],"excerpt":"As regards, third, the argument that the bringing of the action in the main proceedings, seeking review of the legality of ‘intention and/or obligation’ of the national authority to apply or give effect to Regulation 2015/751, is a means of circumventing the system of legal remedies provided for by ","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"d6595d8ec37980696355a11faec3401e6ee0c175c4ad54a9b18e11ed6450dd6a"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-343-09","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-343/09","id":"eu:c-343-09","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-343-09"},"paragraph_ids":["para_222"],"excerpt":"As regards, third, the argument that the bringing of the action in the main proceedings, seeking review of the legality of ‘intention and/or obligation’ of the national authority to apply or give effect to Regulation 2015/751, is a means of circumventing the system of legal remedies provided for by ","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"558cd06699b70987cde4b714d582b8a3b00b6441b7814e91a453535e4d457e8d"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-491-01","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-491/01","id":"eu:c-491-01","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-491-01"},"paragraph_ids":["para_202","para_222","para_224"],"excerpt":"Since the referring court has been called upon to resolve that disagreement and since it considers that there is a real point of contention between the parties in the main proceedings as to the interpretation and validity of the relevant provisions of that regulation, it is not obvious that the disp","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"dad5d5c1d92eeb1fdb24bcba95df3a768e69eb4b2513cc8cf25a50f646e8c605"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-547-14","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-547/14","id":"eu:c-547-14","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-547-14"},"paragraph_ids":["para_222","para_224"],"excerpt":"As regards, third, the argument that the bringing of the action in the main proceedings, seeking review of the legality of ‘intention and/or obligation’ of the national authority to apply or give effect to Regulation 2015/751, is a means of circumventing the system of legal remedies provided for by ","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"44737da835320a55b8804f15949d11924af69538f8ff9922e1c1340831d2012d"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-567-14","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-567/14","id":"eu:c-567-14","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-567-14"},"paragraph_ids":["para_212"],"excerpt":"It follows that the referring court has adequately defined the factual and legal framework within which it has made its request for an interpretation of EU law so as to enable the Court to provide a useful reply to that request (see, by analogy, judgment of 7 July 2016, Genentech, C-567/14 , EU:C:20","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"6578eaf317c832d38677b495f0b1eb241f17f1561d42000978ff0b904c442e41"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-58-08","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-58/08","id":"eu:c-58-08","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-58-08"},"paragraph_ids":["para_313"],"excerpt":"Thus, the criterion to be applied is not whether a measure adopted in such an area was the only or the best possible measure, since its legality can be affected only if the measure is manifestly inappropriate having regard to the objective which the competent institution is seeking to pursue (judgme","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"10887b2542dd5367aa7b661ba4a42e44ebe46a3ee077e1abc23242a501e3db2a"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-304-16~cites~c-72-15","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-304-16","to":{"ref":"C-72/15","id":"eu:c-72-15","url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-72-15"},"paragraph_ids":["para_184"],"excerpt":"However, the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Rules of Procedure make no provision for parties to submit observations in response to the Advocate General’s Opinion (judgment of 28 March 2017, Rosneft, C-72/15 , EU:C:2017:236 , paragraph 41 and the case-law cited).","decided":"2018-02-07","hash":"318b635db5282256a2fcbe9c0efda1f371f1fa58265f5ebace1fdad4410bbf47"}],"incoming":[{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-120-19~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-120-19","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-120-19","paragraph_ids":["para_246","para_248"],"excerpt":"Consequently, where the questions submitted concern the interpretation of a rule of EU law, the Court is in principle bound to give a ruling (judgments of 16 June 2015, Gauweiler and Others, C-62/14 , EU:C:2015:400 , paragraph 24 , and of 7 February 2018, American Express, C-304/16 , EU:C:2018:66 , "},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-151-17~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-151-17","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-151-17","paragraph_ids":["para_152"],"excerpt":"First, it must be recalled that, according to the Court’s settled case-law, the principle of proportionality requires that acts of the EU institutions should be appropriate for attaining the legitimate objectives pursued by the legislation at issue and should not go beyond what is necessary in order"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-197-18~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-197-18","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-197-18","paragraph_ids":["para_243"],"excerpt":"In that regard, it must be recalled that, in accordance with the Court’s settled case-law, in interpreting a provision of EU law it is necessary to consider not only its wording but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (judgment of 7 Februar"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-210-18~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-210-18","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-210-18","paragraph_ids":["para_176"],"excerpt":"However, that does not preclude Annex II to that directive from being interpreted as meaning that the use of passenger platforms falls within the scope of minimum access within the meaning of that annex, since it has already been clarified by settled case-law that, if an act of general application d"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-44-17~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-44-17","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-44-17","paragraph_ids":["para_112"],"excerpt":"The Court has consistently held that, in interpreting a provision of EU law, it is necessary to consider not only its wording but also the context in which it occurs and the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part (see, inter alia, judgments of 23 January 2018, Piotrowski, C-367/16 , EU:"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-493-17~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-493-17","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-493-17","paragraph_ids":["para_213"],"excerpt":"In particular, in the case of a measure intended to have general application, which makes clear the essential objective pursued by the institutions, a specific statement of reasons for each of the technical choices made by the institutions cannot be required (see, to that effect, judgments of 10 Jan"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-509-17~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-509-17","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-509-17","paragraph_ids":["para_102","para_104"],"excerpt":"Consequently, where those questions concern the interpretation of a rule of EU law, the Court is, in principle, bound to give a ruling (judgments of 16 June 2015, Gauweiler and Others, C-62/14 , EU:C:2015:400 , paragraph 24 , and of 7 February 2018, American Express, C-304/16 , EU:C:2018:66 , paragr"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-527-16~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-527-16","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-527-16","paragraph_ids":["para_242","para_244"],"excerpt":"Consequently, where the questions submitted concern the interpretation or the validity of a rule of EU law, the Court is in principle bound to give a ruling (judgment of 7 February 2018, American Express, C-304/16 , EU:C:2018:66 , paragraph 31 and the case-law cited)."},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-549-23~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-549-23","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-549-23","paragraph_ids":["para_95","para_117","para_118","para_120","para_126","para_128","para_129"],"excerpt":"Therefore, although, as a general rule, a three party payment card scheme is not subject to the obligations stemming from Articles 4 and 5 of that regulation, that is not the case where it has issued card-based payment instruments with a co-branding partner, which causes it, in that situation, to be"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-621-18~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-621-18","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-621-18","paragraph_ids":["para_145","para_147","para_153"],"excerpt":"It is not for the Court to call into question the referring court’s assessment of the admissibility of the action in the main proceedings, which falls, in the context of the preliminary ruling proceedings, within the jurisdiction of the national court; nor is it for the Court to determine whether th"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-643-16~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-643-16","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-643-16","paragraph_ids":["para_256"],"excerpt":"That interpretation is not called into question by the argument put forward by MasterCard Europe that the situations in which a three party payment card scheme is subject to the access obligation should be the same as those in which such a system is subject to the obligations relating to interchange"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-645-19~cites~c-304-16","type":"cites","label_sv":"hänvisar till","from":"eu:c-645-19","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-645-19","paragraph_ids":["para_393"],"excerpt":"The Court may refuse to give a ruling on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by a national court only where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of EU law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or whe"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-649-18~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-649-18","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-649-18","paragraph_ids":["para_218","para_220"],"excerpt":"Consequently, where those questions concern the interpretation of a rule of EU law, the Court is in principle bound to give a ruling (see, to that effect, judgments of 16 June 2015, Gauweiler and Others, C-62/14 , EU:C:2015:400 , paragraph 24 , and of 7 February 2018, American Express, C-304/16 , EU"},{"edge_id":"edge:eu:c-680-17~follows~c-304-16","type":"follows","label_sv":"följer","from":"eu:c-680-17","from_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-680-17","paragraph_ids":["para_204"],"excerpt":"As regards the interpretation of Article 32(3) of the Visa Code, in accordance with the Court’s settled case-law, in interpreting provisions of EU law it is necessary to consider not only their wording but also the context in which they occur and the objectives pursued by the rules of which they are"}],"acts":[],"counts":{"outgoing":13,"incoming":14,"acts":0},"follow":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16?follow=5","hash":"d0d54cc9ce9d40a754f04c9e80e3073f6c6f4de627ac4f5bfa85027327c01be3"},"links":{"provisions":null,"case_law":{"precedent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/precedent/eu:c-304-16","conflict":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/conflict/eu:c-304-16","citation_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/citation_graph/eu:c-304-16","weight":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/weight/eu:c-304-16"},"compact":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16?view=compact","representations":{"sv":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-304-16","en":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/en/eu/praxis/c-304-16"},"machine_languages":["en","sv"],"ref":"eu:c-304-16"},"watch":{"risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=eu%3Ac-304-16","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=eu%3Ac-304-16","risk_changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk-changes","node_state":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/node-state?id=eu%3Ac-304-16","provenance":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/provenance/eu:c-304-16"},"metadata":{"schema":"novacopilot_object_metadata/1","canonical_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","official_source":null,"short_answer":null,"short_answer_status":"not_in_register","hash":"d0d54cc9ce9d40a754f04c9e80e3073f6c6f4de627ac4f5bfa85027327c01be3","schema_version":"1","last_verified_at":null,"verification_status":"not_verified_yet","integrity_check_scope":"stored_content_only"},"hash":"sha256:c0b21e07f7a13c4f3039f3b71b8e6e066b100a864fb8d21ef4a32ba112515416","version":"legal-2026-11-02","expires":"2026-11-03T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-11-02+legal-2026-11-02+2026-11-02T16:22:18","content_hash":"sha256:c0b21e07f7a13c4f3039f3b71b8e6e066b100a864fb8d21ef4a32ba112515416","revalidate_after":"2026-11-02T19:20:56.107Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu:c-304-16","disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu%3Ac-304-16","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"withheld":{"links.evidence":3},"access":{"status":"partner_key_required","header":"x-partner-key","contact":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/kontakt","note":"Facts and counts are public. Relationships and decision paths stay inside NovaCopilot."},"access_class":"relationship","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/eu/praxis/c-304-16","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-8c60361fd0b97bf488f74bfe7a752e25","response_hash":"sha256:c0b21e07f7a13c4f3039f3b71b8e6e066b100a864fb8d21ef4a32ba112515416"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-02T18:20:57.032Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obj/edge/eu%3Ac-304-16","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":6861}}