Practical guide
How to draft preliminary ruling observations with AI
4 min read · Updated June 2026 · Editorial oversight: Avv. Federico Papa
Written observations are the primary instrument through which parties to the main proceedings intervene before the Court of Justice of the European Union following a reference for a preliminary ruling under Art. 267 TFEU. This pleading allows parties to influence the interpretation of Union law by providing factual and legal elements that might not have emerged clearly in the national court's order for reference. Participation is governed by Art. 23 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which guarantees the right to submit written observations within strict, non-extendable deadlines. The purpose of the pleading is to ensure that the Court decides with full knowledge of the case's implications within the legal context of origin.
In brief
This technical guide details how to draft observations under Art. 267 TFEU using AI. Pursuant to Art. 23 of the Statute and Art. 51 of the Rules of Procedure, filing via e-Curia must occur within a peremptory deadline of two months and ten days from notification. The pleading includes the regulatory framework, an analysis of the questions, and proposed rulings. Arguments support teleological, systematic, or literal interpretations to ensure the useful effect of Union law. The procedure is free of charge.
The steps
- 1.
Receipt of notification and calculation of time limits
Once the national court issues the order for reference under Art. 267 TFEU, the Registry of the Court of Justice notifies the decision to the interested parties. From this notification, the peremptory deadline of two months begins, extended by a single period of ten days on account of distance, pursuant to Art. 51 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice. It is essential to monitor official notifications to avoid procedural bars that would preclude participation in the written procedure. Notification and filing are mandatory via the e-Curia application for representatives of the parties, pursuant to Art. 48 of the Rules of Procedure.
- 2.
Analysis of questions and delimitation of scope
Observations must focus exclusively on the questions of interpretation or validity raised by the referring court. The parties are not permitted to modify the subject matter of the reference or attempt to introduce new questions not included in the original order for reference. The defense strategy must therefore aim to provide an interpretation useful for resolving the dispute pending before the national court. A preliminary analysis of the questions allows for the exclusion of arguments that are irrelevant to the European proceedings.
- 3.
Synthesis of the regulatory and factual framework
Although the Court is bound by the facts established by the national court, the parties may clarify the relevant national regulatory framework. It is essential to explain how national provisions interact with the Union rules subject to interpretation. An accurate description of the context helps the Court understand the practical scope of the question and its potential systemic consequences. This section serves as a logical bridge between the main proceedings and EU law.
- 4.
Development of legal argumentation
This section must contain an in-depth analysis of the EU provisions cited in the order for reference or otherwise relevant to the case. Arguments should be developed in favor of a specific teleological, systematic, or literal interpretation of the applicable Union law. Counsel must highlight how the proposed interpretation ensures the useful effect (effet utile) of EU law in the specific case. It is also advisable to invoke the general principles of Union law to support the defense's position.
- 5.
Formulation of proposed answers
The pleading must conclude with a clear and concise proposed ruling for each question raised by the national court. These proposed answers should be formulated so that the Court can adopt them directly into the text of the ruling. A well-structured proposal significantly facilitates the work of the Judge-Rapporteur and the Advocate General. Clarity of exposition at this final stage is decisive for the acceptance of the party's position.
- 6.
Compliance with formal requirements and filing
Observations must be drafted in the language of the case, which corresponds to that of the national court. Filing takes place via the e-Curia application, following registration by the lawyer authorized to practice before national courts. It is imperative to comply with the Practical Instructions to parties, which impose strict page limits to ensure conciseness. Proper formatting and an analytical index of annexes complete the electronic submission to the Registry.
Legal basis: art. 267 TFUEart. 23 Statuto della Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europeaRegolamento di Procedura della Corte di GiustiziaRules of Procedure of the Court of Justice
The template structure
The standard sections that make up the document. The full template can be opened and completed directly on edit.legal.
Court of Justice addressed
Identification of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the assigned preliminary ruling case number.
Party and main proceedings
Identification of the party submitting the observations and references to the case pending before the national court.
Preliminary questions
Verbatim reproduction of the questions of interpretation or validity submitted to the Court in the order for reference.
Factual and legal context
Summary of the relevant facts of the main proceedings and the national and European regulatory framework.
Legal arguments
Detailed legal analysis of the correct interpretation or validity of the relevant Union rules.
Proposed answers to the questions
Formulation of the rulings suggested to the Court for the resolution of each preliminary question.
Date and signature
Signature of the authorized lawyer and list of documents attached to the observations.
Mistakes to avoid
- Incorrect calculation of the two-month deadline under Art. 23 of the Statute, ignoring that the time limit is peremptory and non-extendable.
- Inclusion of new preliminary questions not submitted by the national court, which will be declared inadmissible by the Court.
- Violation of page limits established by the Practical Instructions, resulting in a risk of a request for rectification or summary.
- Filing the document in a language other than that of the national proceedings without the required prior authorization.
Frequently asked questions
What is the precise deadline for filing observations?
The deadline is two months from the notification of the order for reference, plus a fixed ten days on account of distance. Failure to comply results in the inadmissibility of the observations.
Is a court filing fee required?
No, the preliminary ruling procedure before the Court of Justice is free of charge for the parties to the main proceedings. No court fees or judicial taxes are required for submitting written observations.
Can observations be submitted in reply to those of other parties?
In principle no: the written procedure allows only one filing per party. Any replies may be presented orally during the hearing, if one is held.
What edit.legal automates
- —Automated verification of document compliance with the page limits provided by the CJEU Practical Instructions.
- —AI-based suggestions for drafting the proposed ruling in line with the style of European case law.
- —Cross-check of regulatory references regarding Art. 267 TFEU and Art. 23 of the Statute for correct citation.
Put edit.legal to the test on actual cases
Try edit.legal for free on an active case. No credit card required.
Try edit.legal for freeThis guide is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice for your specific case.