search

… In that regard, of the , which guarantees the right to effective judicial protection, must be taken into account where the exercise of that right by victims might be impeded. An extension of the immunity of EESC members beyond its strictly functional character would undermine that right. …

… Functional immunity, while pursuing a legitimate public interest, is not absolute and must be reconciled with the need to avoid criminal impunity and to ensure and investigations and judgments. (44) Therefore, where the alleged offences are not in the interest of the European Union, their coverage by immunity would create a risk of impunity incompatible with that provision, by depriving the victims of an effective remedy. 92. …

… Furthermore, the Supreme Court in a resolution on legal interpretation of 23 January 2020 found that the DCSC had “structurally fail[ed] to fulfil the criteria of an court within the meaning of of the and Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and Article 6 § 1 [of the Convention]” (ibid., §§ 199-200). 133. …

… Poland (Disciplinary regime for judges), C‑791/19, EU:C:2021:596, that Poland had failed to fulfil its obligations under 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union by, in particular, “failing to guarantee the and of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court” (see Tuleya, cited above, §§ 229-31 and 441). …

… It follows from the first sentence of the second paragraph of of the that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. The Court has stressed that the guarantees of an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law represent the cornerstone of the right to a fair trial. (25) 35. …

… The principle of the effective judicial protection of individuals’ rights under EU law, referred to in the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, is a general principle of EU law reaffirmed by of the . As previously indicated, (24) while the latter provision is not applicable in the present case, as such, it must be duly taken into consideration for the purposes of interpreting the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU. …

… Third, the referring court considers that OUG No 62/2024 adversely affects the right to a fair trial guaranteed, inter alia, by of the . Litigants may perceive that that emergency order favours the administration in cases concerning salary entitlements and that judges of the lower courts do not enjoy the public trust necessary to adopt decisions on their own, which undermines public confidence in the judicial system. …

… . - The first part of the second plea, relating to infringement of the principles of and in the conduct of the investigation procedure 45 The applicant argues that, both in the report at issue and in the contested decision, which validates the former, statements, complaints and evidence submitted by him were not examined, in breach of 22.1 and 27 of the Dignity at Work Policy and Article 41 of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 46 The EIB disputes …

… the applicant’s arguments. In that regard, it should be borne in mind that, under the first paragraph of Article 21 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union and Article 76(d) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, the application initiating proceedings must contain a brief statement of the pleas in law on which the application is based. 48 According to settled case-law, the information given must be sufficiently clear and precise to enable the defendant to prepare …

… Until now, the possibility of relying on such a ground has been considered in relation to a risk of infringement of the fundamental rights guaranteed in 4 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment), 7 (right to respect for family and private life) and (right to an effective remedy before an and tribunal previously established by law) of the . 54. …

… In my view, there is no reason to exclude outright and categorically the possibility that a risk of infringement of the fundamental right enshrined in 49(3) of the Charter may also justify, in exceptional circumstances, a refusal to surrender on the basis of Article 1(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584. …

… and tribunal established by law to be able, in accordance with a procedure that fully safeguards the rights enshrined in and 48 of the , to review the validity of that decision and that of the decision not to adjudicate of a body such as the [NCJ] concerning the challenge brought against that transfer decision.” …

… THE LAW ALLEGED VIOLATION OF 6 § 1 OF THE CONVENTION as regards the review of the decision on the applicant’s TRANSFER 51. …

… The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that his right to safeguard and respect his individual by the State authorities and his right to have the decision on his transfer reviewed by an independent and body had not been respected in the proceedings concerning his transfer, both as regards the proceedings held before the NCJ and in so far as there had been no judicial review of the NCJ’s resolution of 25 July 2019 dismissing his appeal against the transfer …

… . …’ 5 of the , entitled ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’, states: ‘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 . …

… Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law … …’ Italian law Law No 287/90 6 Article 1 of legge n. 287 - Norme per la tutela della concorrenza e del mercato (Law No 287 adopting provisions for the protection of competition and the market) of 10 October 1990 (GURI No 240 of 13 October 1990, p. 3), in the version applicable to the dispute in the main proceedings (‘Law No 287/90’), entitled ‘Scope and …

… 19(1) TEU, to ensure that in the interpretation and application of the Treaties the law is observed. 110 As is apparent from settled case-law, since the Court has exclusive jurisdiction to give the definitive and binding interpretation of EU law, it is for the Court to specify the requirements arising from the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with of the , as regards the criteria of , and the previous establishment by law of …

… The 13 Title VI of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’), entitled ‘Justice’, includes, in particular, thereof, entitled ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’, which is worded as follows: ‘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 . …

… longer offers the guarantees of an and tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU in conjunction with Article of the , on account, first, of obvious irregularities in the appointment of judges to that court in December 2015, in manifest disregard of Polish constitutional law, and, second, of serious irregularities in the appointment of the President of that court in December 2016. …

… Thus, of the was deployed to define the substantive content of the obligation arising from the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU in three respects. …

… the judgment in Royal Football Club Seraing, (43) given after the closure of the written part of the procedure in the present cases and the subject of intense discussion at the hearing, that the right to an effective remedy guaranteed by of the presupposes that the bodies are capable of carrying out an effective judicial review of the acts, measures or behaviour alleged to have infringed the rights or freedoms of an individual. …

… That finding led the Court to clarify, first, that the latter provision must be ‘duly taken into consideration’ for the purpose of interpreting the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU (39) and, secondly, that the obligation imposed on Member States in the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU to provide a system of remedies sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection in the fields covered by EU law corresponds to the right to an effective remedy guaranteed in of the …

… 2 [TEU], which, in setting out the values on which the European Union is founded, refers to respect for the rule of law, and the second subparagraph of 19(1) [TEU], read in conjunction with of the [], according to which the Member States are to ensure effective judicial protection based on the right of access to an and tribunal, be interpreted as meaning that the principle of judicial independence precludes a refusal to include also, within the scope …

… Recommendation CM/Rec(2010) 12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, entitled ‘Judges: independence, efficiency and responsibilities’, adopted on 17 November 2010, and point 6.4 of the European Charter on the statute for judges, adopted in Strasbourg on 10 July 1998 by the Council of Europe. 17 In those circumstances the Tribunalul Neamț (Regional Court, Neamț) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: ‘Must …