search

… and 48 of the (see, to that effect, judgment of 6 October 2021, W.Ż. …

… (Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court - Appointment), C-487/19, EU:C:2021:798, paragraph 118). 55 Next, the Court has held that the fundamental right to a fair trial and, in particular, the guarantees of access to an and tribunal previously established by law which characterise that fundamental right, mean in particular that every court is obliged to check whether, as composed, it constitutes such a tribunal where a serious doubt arises on …

… set of guarantees essential to safeguarding the independence of the judiciary (see, to that effect, judgment of 18 May 2021, Asociația ‘Forumul Judecătorilor din România’ and Others, C-83/19, C-127/19, C-195/19, C-291/19, C-355/19 and C-397/19, EU:C:2021:393, paragraph 198 and the case-law cited). 54 Similarly, transfer measures without consent, adopted outside of a disciplinary regime, must be open to legal challenge, in accordance with a procedure which fully safeguards the rights enshrined in …

… As the Court has consistently stated, including in Simpson (a case which concerned an error in the appointment process in respect of a judge of the then European Union Civil Service Tribunal), it follows from the fundamental right to an and tribunal previously established by law, enshrined under of the , that ‘every court is obliged to check whether, as composed, it constitutes such a tribunal where a serious doubt arises on that point. …

… The Court has consistently stated that 19 TEU gives concrete expression to the core value of the rule of law under 2 TEU, (23) entrusting the responsibility for ensuring judicial review in the EU legal order to the Court of Justice of the European Union and the national courts. (24) The right to effective judicial review by an tribunal - which is now enshrined in of the - has been referred to by the Court as forming part of ‘the essence of the rule of …

… law’. (25) The Court has also held that the guarantee of - which has two aspects, independence stricto sensu and (26) - is inherent in the task of adjudication and is, thus, required both at EU level (as regards the members of the Court of Justice of the European Union) and at Member State level (as regards the members of the national courts which may rule on questions concerning the application or interpretation of EU law). (27) 46. …

… of the must, on any view, be rejected. 120 The fifth plea in law must therefore be rejected. …

… Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. …

… of the , entitled ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’, states, in the first and second paragraphs thereof: ‘Everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the law of the Union are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in this . …

… It is common ground that that body is not . 13 It follows that a court composed of a judge appointed on a proposal from the National Council of the Judiciary, in the composition resulting from the law referred to in the preceding paragraph, is not properly composed and cannot be regarded as an and tribunal within the meaning, inter alia, of of the . 14 In addition, the referring court states, in its request for a preliminary ruling in Case C-160/ …

… It would then have to discontinue those proceedings and the criminal liability of KB, RZ, AN and CG should be the subject of new court decisions. 18 In those circumstances, the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Regional Court, Warsaw) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: ‘(1) Must the second subparagraph of 19(1) [TEU], of the … and the general principles of European Union law: the principles of legal …

… certainty, inviolability of final court judgments, proportionality, and procedural autonomy, be interpreted as precluding any national legislation which prevents a court, in proceedings for enforcement of a final criminal conviction, from examining whether an enforceable judgment was given by a court which satisfies the requirements relating to establishment by law and also and and, if it is established that those requirements have not been satisfied, in accordance with …

… That latter provision must therefore be taken into consideration when interpreting the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU. (23) Under of the , everyone whose rights guaranteed by EU law are violated is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. (24) 29. …

… May associations of judges and prosecutors established with the object of promoting an , and efficient judicial system (2) rely on 2 and Article 19(1) TEU, read in the light of Articles 12 and of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), to establish their locus standi to bring an action in furtherance of those aims before a national court? Legal framework - national legislation 2. …

… The effective judicial protection of individuals’ rights under EU law is a general principle which stems from the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, as enshrined in 6 and 13 ECHR and reaffirmed by of the . …

… In paragraph 73 of that judgment, the Court interpreted the expression ‘ review body’, within the meaning of the second subparagraph of 2a(2) of Directive 89/665, as referring to an and tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning of of the . …

… In that context, observance of the right of such a tenderer to effective judicial protection requires that the body ruling on the lawfulness of the exclusion of that tenderer be an and tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning of of the . 68 However, those considerations do not apply with respect to the review body of first instance referred to in Article 2(3) of Directive 89/665. …

… In paragraph 75 of that judgment, it specified that ‘only the definitive exclusion, within the meaning of [the second subparagraph of] Article 2a(2) of Directive 89/665, can have the effect of depriving a tenderer of standing to challenge the [contract] award decision’. 67 It may thus happen that a decision by the ‘ review body’ referred to in the second subparagraph of 2a(2) leads to a tenderer being deprived of standing to challenge a contract award decision. …

… 2, 6(1) and (3), and the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with of the [] and 267 TFEU, be interpreted as meaning that a court of last instance of a Member State (the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court)) whose composition includes persons appointed to the post of judge in breach of the fundamental rules of law of the Member State applicable to judicial appointments to the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court) is not an , tribunal …

… Konstytucyjny (Constitutional Court) deprives the parties to a judicial proceeding of the possibility of contesting the lawfulness of the composition of a court, constitutes an interference in the exercise of judicial activity and cannot bind that court since it emanates from a court itself unlawfully composed. 29 In those circumstances the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: ‘(1) Must …

… That reporting judge has doubts as to the compliance of the composition of that panel of judges with, in particular, 19(1) TEU and of the , on account of the presence in that panel of Judge A.Z., who was appointed in accordance with the procedure in force following the reforms of the Polish judicial system. 67 By his questions, that reporting judge thus seeks to ascertain whether a judge, who is a member of the same panel of judges as himself in the case in the main proceedings …

… and who was appointed in certain specific circumstances, meets the requirements inherent in an and tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning of EU law. 68 In that regard, it is true that every court is obliged to verify whether, in its composition, it constitutes an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning, in particular, of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, where a serious doubt arises on that point, …

… of those provisions of EU law, with the result that that panel of judges does not constitute a ‘court or tribunal’ within the meaning of 267 TFEU. 59 In that regard, it is necessary to bear in mind the inextricable links which, according to the wording of the second paragraph of of the , exist, for the purposes of the fundamental right to a fair trial, within the meaning of that provision, between the guarantees of judicial and as well as that …

… to 57 above, on the one hand, and in paragraphs 62 to 76 above, on the other, which characterised the appointment, within the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs, of the three judges constituting the referring body in the present case, is that the Chamber does not have the status of an and tribunal previously established by law for the purposes of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of the second paragraph of of the …

… and tribunal previously established by law for the purposes of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of the second paragraph of Article of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) (judgment of 29 March 2022, Getin Noble Bank, C-132/20, EU:C:2022:235, paragraph 72). 45 In that regard, it should be noted at the outset that the judgment in Dolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v. …

… In that regard, it should be noted that proceedings No [confidential] were still at the stage of the pre-trial investigation, which had been transferred to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau a short time before, with the result that they had not been brought before a Ukrainian court for consideration of the merits, the Ukrainian court having been seised only of procedural matters. 117 The second paragraph of of the , which is the standard by reference to which the Council must …

… assess the observance of the right to effective judicial protection (see judgments of 3 February 2021, Klymenko v Council, T-258/20, EU:T:2021:52, paragraph 98 and the case-law cited, and of 9 June 2021, Yanukovych v Council, T-302/19, not published, EU:T:2021:333, paragraph 116), provides that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. 118 In so far as the Charter contains rights which correspond …