Special Issue – Preliminary References to the CJEU Part Two Pouring New Wine into New Bottles? The Preliminary Reference to the CJEU by the Italian Constitutional Court By Giorgio Repetto * A. Introduction In the ongoing debate about preliminary references raised by constitutional courts, the Italian Corte costituzionale (Constitutional Court, hereafter, ICC) is apparently a latecomer. Despite its pivotal role in the founding era in which the relationships between Community law and national legal orders were assessed, its reluctance towards preliminary references to the ECJ (since 2009: Court of Justice of the European Union, CJEU) 1 has repeatedly been invoked as a standard in legal scholarship. Whereas from the early 1960s onwards it engaged dialectically with the CJEU, and contributed to some basic tenets of EC law vis-à- vis national law (direct effect, primacy, limits concerning basic constitutional principles, so- called counter-limits), 2 it appeared for a long time to be almost silent on the crucial aspect concerning its ability to enter into a direct dialogue with the CJEU via the preliminary reference procedure. Although this ambivalence may appear contradictory, one should not forget that behind the sceŶes, dialogue took plaĐe aloŶg iŶdiƌeĐt oƌ hiddeŶ ĐhaŶŶels. Either in response to claims raised by the judiciary in incidenter proceedings, or in adjudicating disputes between State and Regions in principaliter ones, the ICC often sent messages and alerts to the CJEU. In so doing, it indirectly contributed to shaping the relationships between EU law and domestic law. 3 IŶ the loŶg ƌuŶ, the aďseŶĐe of the ICCs direct involvement in the relationships with the CJEU has, however, estranged its action from the core of EU law in favor of the partnership between the CJEU and the common judges (both ordinary and administrative). 4 * Associate Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Perugia. 1 For the sake of uniformity, throughout the present article I will use the current denomination of the Court even when I refer to pre–2009 cases and situations, whereas EU law is used to refer to Union law in general. 2 Like in the seminal Costa (judgment 7. March 1964, no. 14), Frontini (judgment 17. Decembrer 1973, no. 183) and Granital (judgment 8. June 1984, no. 170) cases. All judgments and orders of the ICC are available at http://www.cortecostituzionale.it/actionPronuncia.do. A selection of recent cases (since 2006) translated into English is available at http://www.cortecostituzionale.it/ActionPagina_1260.do. 3 For an insightful overview on hidden dialogue, see Giuseppe Martinico, Judging in the Multilevel Legal Order: EdžploƌiŶg the TeĐhŶiƋues of Hidden Dialogue, 21 K.L.J. 257 (2010). 4 Moving from the functions demanded of Constitutional Courts in the process of European legal integration as elaborated by Monica Claes and Bruno De Witte, one may summarize the overall approach of the ICC in the