search

… is an and court previously established by law within the meaning of European Union law? …

… The fourth question 64 By its fourth question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of of the , must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation where it is found, on the basis of a decision of the Court, that a judicial body of last instance does not satisfy the requirements of , and previous establishment by law, within the meaning of that provision, a decision taken by such a …

… Thus, in those circumstances, the referring court must regard that judgment as null and void. 70 In the light of all the foregoing considerations, the answer to the fourth question is that the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of of the , must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation where it is found, on the basis of a decision of the Court, that a judicial body of last instance does not satisfy the requirements of , and …

… of of the (see, to that effect, judgment of 29 July 2024, Breian, C-318/24 PPU, EU:C:2024:658, paragraph 80). 39 It is therefore necessary to determine whether the requirements of and laid down in the second paragraph of of the preclude national legislation which allows a criminal court, at the end of the criminal trial, to convict an accused person for an offence set out in the indictment, even where the public prosecutor, after submitting …

… Provisional text JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 1 August 2025 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Directive (EU) 2016/343 - 6 - Burden of proof that the accused person is guilty - Second paragraph of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right of access to an and tribunal - Charge withdrawn in part by the public prosecutor’s office during …

… The and of judges are therefore essential conditions for guaranteeing the presumption of innocence (see, to that effect, judgment of 16 November 2021, Prokuratura Rejonowa w Mińsku Mazowieckim and Others, C-748/19 to C-754/19, EU:C:2021:931, paragraph 88). 38 The right of every person to be heard by an and tribunal previously established by law is one of the requirements inherent in the fundamental right to a fair trial guaranteed by the second paragraph …

… 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with of the [], be interpreted as requiring that such a judge should, for the purpose of protecting his or her and autonomy, have an effective remedy against that decision before an and tribunal in a procedure which satisfies the requirements of and 48 of the ? …

… had the opportunity to challenge their appointment before an and tribunal in a procedure which satisfies the requirements of and 48 of the , is not an , tribunal previously established by law and giving individuals effective access to justice in areas covered by EU law?’ …

… , having regard to its own case-law relating to the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with the second paragraph of of the , various findings and assessments made, first, by the European Court of Human Rights in the judgment of 3 February 2022, Advance Pharma sp. z o.o. v. …

… (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland)) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - 267 TFEU - 19(1) TEU - of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Procedure for the appointment of a national judge - Judicial and - Nemo iudex in causa sua) I. Introduction 1. …

… Those principles and rules, a fortiori when interpreted in the light of 19(1) TEU and of the , as well as 6(1) ECHR, would lead to the exclusion from the panel of any judge whose or could be doubted in the eyes of the public. 25. I am also of the view that the second and third questions are admissible. 26. …

… By its first question, the referring court essentially asks the Court whether 19(1) TEU, read in the light of of the , should be interpreted as meaning that the circumstances of a judicial appointment may, in and of themselves, indicate that a judge fails to meet the requirements of and enshrined in those provisions. 22. …

… . …’ 5 of the , entitled ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’, reads 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 . Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. …

… The third part of the second question in Case C-636/23, and the second part of the first question in Case C-637/23 52 By the third part of its second question in Case C-636/23, and by the second part of its first question in Case C-637/23, the referring court asks, in essence, whether 13 of Directive 2008/115, read in the light of of the , must be interpreted as requiring that a decision not to grant a period for voluntary departure may be challenged in legal proceedings …

… . 53 In that regard, it should be recalled that 13(1) of that directive guarantees the third-country national concerned an effective remedy to challenge return decisions, decisions banning entry to the territory of the Member States and decisions on removal before a competent judicial or administrative authority, or a competent body composed of members who are and who enjoy safeguards of . 54 Those procedural safeguards, combined with those provided for in Article 12 …

… (Withdrawal of cases from a judge), C-647/21 and C-648/21, EU:C:2025:143, paragraph 89 and the case-law cited). 84 The second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, interpreted in the light of of the , which imposes on the Member States a clear and precise obligation as to the result to be achieved and which is not subject to any conditions, in particular as regards the and of the courts called upon to interpret and apply EU law and the requirement that those …

… Legal context European Union law The 3 of the 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. …

… that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.’ 10 of the , headed ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’, states, in the second paragraph: ‘Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. …

… The European Parliament and the Council [of the European Union], acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt measures to: (a) lay down rules and procedures for ensuring recognition throughout the Union of all forms of judgments and judicial decisions; …’ 9 19 of the , entitled ‘Protection in the event of removal, expulsion or extradition’, provides, in paragraph 2: ‘No one may be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk …

… French law 11 696-4 of the code de procédure pénale (Code of Criminal Procedure) provides: ‘Extradition shall not be granted if: (1) the requested person had French nationality at the time of the offence for which extradition is sought; …’ The dispute in the main proceedings and the question referred for a preliminary ruling 12 On 3 December 2010, KN, who holds Greek and Georgian nationalities, was sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment by the Municipal Court of Poti (Georgia). …

… Findings of the Court 42 As regards, in the first place, the ground for complaint that 27(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court does not meet the requirements of of the , it should be recalled that, as set out in the first sentence of the second paragraph of that , ‘everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law.’ 43 In that regard, since the first sentence …

… The first ground of appeal Arguments of the parties 37 The CC submits that the designation, by the President of the General Court, of another Judge-Rapporteur and the reassignment of the case to another Chamber of the General Court, carried out pursuant to 27(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the General Court, was decided contrary to of the , which provides that everyone is entitled to a fair hearing by an and tribunal previously established by law and …

… of the second paragraph of of the corresponds to the first sentence of Article 6(1) of the ECHR, its meaning and scope are, in accordance with Article 52(3) of the Charter, the same as those laid down by the ECHR. …