The European Parliament has decided to undertake a review of the Essay

The European Parliament has decided to undertake a review of the development of the Preliminary Reference Procedure under Articl - Essay casefulOnly the court of arbitrator is accorded by such power to give preliminary rulings except in cases stated under expressions 275 and 276 TFEU and Article 10 of communications protocol (No 36) on Transitional Provisions of the Treaty of Lisbon (OJEU 2008 C 115, p. 322). Legal luminaries explained that the procedure was laid to ensure the effectiveness of the cooperation of the Court of Justice and national courts. It eases the procedural mechanism (a) to ascertain what court has jurisdiction to hear and interpret hesitation of laws with uniformity (b) stomach guidance for national courts in the application of this procedure. The question should to a fault be stated in a legal form clearly, concisely and plain. Information must detail the subject on dispute, findings of factual situation and should be written in a tenor following possibl e applicable provision of laws with citation of national case-laws with correct references. The national court must provide ample reason which motivated the body to bring the question to the Court of Justice for interpretation or validity as well as the relations of such stipulation to the national provisions. It must also have summary of relevant contentions of parties under such proceedings. The ruling will be rendered by the Court of Justice free of fees or charges. This ruling procedure is solely for the interpretation of statutes, provisions and not about laws application to facts of cases. The process tasked the Court of Justice to simply interpret the meaning of the statutes and provisions of Europian Union Law which will be stated in a formal reply, but the referring court will fill the responsibility to make conclusion from such reply. The Court of Justice will not assume jurisdiction on cases where there is no genuine dispute, question of law apparently is hypothetical or if the national court failed to give factual legal information of the case. Further, under this new provision, as stipulated in Article 267 TFEU, those who can submit a question of law are any of the Member States court or tribunal who is aiming at gaining smooth judicial interpretation of a law. The national court may or may not refer a question to the Court of Justice in a preliminary hearing in order to arrive at appropriate understanding of the provisions and therefore help hasten the resolve of an get it on brought to its attention with sense of resoluteness. If its evident that correct interpretation of the rule of law is present, the question need not be elevated to the Court of Justice for legal remedy. It is the role of the national court to provide reasons about the necessity for Court of Justice to give judgment on a question raisedwhich must be, by the way, contextualized on factual and legal contexts. To reiterate, only new questions of interpretation should be subm itted to intentionally draw uniformity of understanding and application of European Union law to cases or when circumstance arise where an existing case-law is not applicable to such set of facts. Critics to this procedure however raised that the procedure expect inapplicable to labor laws because Member States