The exceptions set out above only apply to requests for interpretation and cannot be applied to questions relating to the validity of acts of the Union. Even if the Court of Justice has declared the corresponding provisions of a similar act invalid in the past, the national courts are still required to refer. Case C-461/03, Gaston Schul, para. 19 and 25 Interim proceedings There is no obligation for the highest court to refer either when giving judgment in interim proceedings, provided that each of the Wettbonus parties is entitled to institute normal proceedings on the substance of the case or to require that. Joined cases 35/82 and 36/82, Morson and Jhanjan, para. 10 In principle, the court hearing the interim proceedings is also required to refer if it has any doubts about the validity of an act of the Union and wishes to preclude the act for that reason. However, in this case, the exceptions mentioned above under „Validity“ come into play, i.e. application of the act may be suspended on the condition that the court immediately asks the Court of Justice to rule on the act’s validity, also submitting its reasons for doubting its Bonusangebot validity.