search

… JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Sixth Chamber, Extended Composition) 14 September 2022 (*) (Competition - Abuse of dominant position - Smart mobile devices - Decision finding an infringement of Article 102 TFEU and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement - Concepts of multi-sided platform and market (‘ecosystem’) - Operating system (Google Android) - App store (Play Store) - Search and browser applications (Google Search and Chrome) - Agreements with device manufacturers and mobile network operators - Single …

… According to the Explanations relating to the of Fundamental Rights, (63) the second paragraph of of the corresponds to 6(1) ECHR. The Court must, therefore, ensure that the interpretation which it gives to the second paragraph of of the safeguards a level of protection which does not fall below the level of protection established in 6(1) ECHR, as interpreted by the ECtHR. (64) 100. …

… The requirement of a ‘tribunal established by law’ and the requirements of ‘’ and ‘’ of a tribunal form part of the ‘institutional requirements’ of Article 6(1) ECHR. In the case-law of the ECtHR, there is a very close interrelationship between those requirements. (65) 101. …

… In its judgment in Openbaar Ministerie (Tribunal established by law in the issuing Member State), the Court confirmed, with reference to the judicial appointment procedure in the issuing Member State, the need for a two-step examination where the guarantee - also inherent in the fundamental right to a fair trial enshrined in the second paragraph of of the - of a tribunal previously established by law is at issue, and it described the conditions and detailed rules for applying that …

… ORDER OF THE COURT (Eighth Chamber) 12 July 2022 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - European arrest warrant - Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA - 1(3) - Surrender procedure between Member States - Conditions for execution - of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Second paragraph of - Fundamental right to a fair trial before an and tribunal …

… of the Polish courts concerned, which is a separate question from whether those courts were previously established by law within the meaning of the second paragraph of of the . 9 According to the applicants in the main proceedings, if those courts were not established by law, there would be no need to determine whether they are or . …

… and of that panel, there has been a breach of that person’s fundamental right to a fair trial before an and tribunal previously established by law, enshrined in the second paragraph of of the , and - in the context of a European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution, only if that authority finds that, in the particular circumstances of the case, there are substantial grounds for believing that, having regard …

… of the . …

… JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Ninth Chamber) 7 July 2022 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU - Obligation on Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law - 267 TFEU - Obligation on the referring court to give full effect to the interpretation of EU law provided by the Court of Justice - of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - - Access to an and …

… In that regard, it is sufficient to observe that, where, in the field of EU law concerned, individuals have access to an and tribunal previously established by law, which appears to be the case, subject to verification by the referring court, in the Italian legal system, the right of access to such a tribunal, enshrined in the , is respected, and the rule of national law which restricts the possibility of seeking revision of judgments of the supreme court of the administrative …

… In addition, that presumption may be rebutted where a judicial decision that has become final handed down by a national or international court or tribunal leads to the conclusion that the judge or judges constituting the referring court is or are not 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 of Fundamental Rights. …

… It cannot therefore be inferred from that presumption that the conditions for appointment of the judges that make up the referring court necessarily satisfy the guarantees of access to an and tribunal previously established by law for the purposes of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU and of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (see, to that effect, judgment of 29 March 2022, Getin Noble Bank, C-132/20, EU:C:2022:235, paragraph 74). 51 …

… The same would apply if there were, beyond the personal situation of the judge or judges formally making a request under 267 TFEU, other factors which would have repercussions on the functioning of the referring court to which that judge belongs - or those judges belong - and thus contribute to undermining the and of that court (see, to that effect, judgment of 29 March 2022, Getin Noble Bank, C-132/20, EU:C:2022:235, paragraphs 72 and 75). 52 In the present case …

… and tribunal previously established by law, as enshrined in the second paragraph of of the . (12) 53. …

… for ensuring that the rights conferred by EU law are effectively protected in each case and, in particular, for ensuring compliance, first, with the principle that the addressees of decisions that significantly affect their interests must be placed in a position in which they can effectively make known their views as regards the information on which the authorities intend to base their decision and, second, with the right of any person to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an …

… EUROPEAN UNION LAW AND PRACTICE The of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 38. of the EU (Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial) provides: “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. Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented. Legal aid shall be made available to those who lack sufficient resources in so far as such aid is necessary to ensure effective access to justice.” Ahmed Mahamdia v. People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria (Case C‑154/11 ECLI:EU:C:2012:491) 39. Mr. …

… 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-303/19, not published, EU:T:2021:334, paragraph 124 and the case-law cited), provides that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and …

… Anti-Corruption Bureau, 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, notwithstanding the fact that the Pechersk District Court had delivered a decision on 27 July 2015 granting the PGO permission to proceed in absentia (see, to that effect, judgment of 9 June 2021, Yanukovych v Council, T-303/19, not published, EU:T:2021:334, paragraph 123). 114 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 and the case-law cited), provides that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and …

… confidential], initiated in 2014 and currently suspended, were still at the stage of the pre-trial investigation, itself recently transferred to the Ukrainian National Police Department, 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 (see, to that effect, judgment of 9 June 2021, Yanukovych v Council, T-302/19, not published, EU:T:2021:333, paragraph 115). 111 The second paragraph of …

… of the order for reference that those questions concern, in essence, the interpretation of the principle of and of tribunals under the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU and Article of the . …

… 19(1) TEU, with the result that it must meet the requirements of effective judicial protection. 93 To guarantee that such a court is in a position to ensure the effective legal protection thus required under the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, maintaining its and is essential, as confirmed by the second paragraph of of the , which refers to access to an ‘’ tribunal as one of the requirements linked to the fundamental right to an effective …

… Consideration of the questions referred Questions 1 to 5 Preliminary observations 77 Questions 1 to 5 referred for a preliminary ruling concern the interpretation of 2, 4(3), 6(1) and (3) and the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU in conjunction with the first and second paragraphs of of the and the third paragraph of 267 TFEU, 38 of the and 7(1) and (2) of Directive 93/13. 78 However, it is apparent from the grounds …