search

… review by an and tribunal. …

… In essence, Kendrion claims that the main appeal should be dismissed in its entirety because a conflict of interest exists in the present proceedings: the European Union is represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union (the institution), which acts before the Court of Justice (the highest judicial body within that institution). (10) Accordingly, in its view the appeal runs afoul of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) which guarantees a …

… 268 TFEU and Article 340, second and third paragraphs, TFEU are very clear in giving the Court of Justice of the European Union exclusive jurisdiction with regard to actions against the European Union for non-contractual liability. (11) Those provisions do not contain any exception: the Court of Justice of the European Union is thus to rule also on liability deriving from its own acts or omissions, whether committed in its administrative capacity or in its judicial capacity. …

… and of courts and tribunals, the judge concerned could not be regarded as a judge assigned by law for the purposes of the first sentence of the second paragraph of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and, therefore, set aside the judgment of 28 June 2016, FV v Council (F-40/15, EU:F:2016:137) in its entirety. 44 It is sufficient to state in the present case that the order under appeal was adopted by the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) composed …

… the second place, Mr Sant’Anna and, in the third place, Mr Kornezov, the General Court held that that institution was entitled to make the first two appointments from that list, but not the third appointment. 43 Thirdly, in paragraph 78 of the judgment of 23 January 2018, FV v Council (T-639/16 P, EU:T:2018:22), the General Court held that in the light of the importance of observing the rules governing the appointment of a judge with regard to litigants’ confidence and that of the public in the …

… The 11. of the , headed ‘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. …

… Likewise, it seems to me that the mutual recognition of European arrest warrants presupposes that the sentences for the execution of which they have been issued were imposed at the end of judicial proceedings satisfying, in particular, the requirements of and laid down in the second paragraph of of the . …

… The second paragraph of of the provides that everyone is entitled to a hearing by an and tribunal. 89. According to settled case-law, the concept of independence has two aspects. The first aspect, which is external, entails the body being protected against external intervention or pressure liable to jeopardise the independent judgment of its members as regards proceedings before them. …

… a court, meaning, among other things, that they are entitled to a public hearing in the event of a dispute in conditions guaranteeing and . 108 According to the applicant, of the of Fundamental Rights was infringed in so far as the on-the-spot checks and inspections were carried out by OLAF without its investigators being accompanied by national police officers, without the applicant having been informed of its right to resist those operations and without …

… That obligation follows from recital 51 of the regulation. 106 Regulation No 2185/96 states, in recital 12, that ‘on-the-spot checks and inspections are carried out with due regard to the fundamental rights of the persons concerned’. 107 In the present case, the applicant argues that in carrying out its on-the-spot checks and inspections, OLAF infringed of the of Fundamental Rights, which essentially provides that individuals in the EU have the right to an effective remedy before …

… Italics added. 29 See point 40 of the present Opinion. 30 In this regard, the first paragraph of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union provides that everyone whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by European Union law are violated has the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal in compliance with the conditions laid down in that . …

… Under the second paragraph of that article, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal previously established by law. See, by analogy, Decision of 12 July 2012, Review Arango Jaramillo and Others v EIB (C-334/12 RX, EU:C:2012:468). 31 See footnote 12. …

… of entails that ‘a decision of an administrative authority that does not itself satisfy the conditions of and impartiality must be subject to subsequent control by a judicial body that must, in particular, have jurisdiction to consider all the relevant issues’. (70) 104. …

… Indeed, concerning the right of access to a court, the Court has held that ‘for a “tribunal” to be able to determine a dispute concerning rights and obligations arising under EU law in accordance with of the , [that tribunal] must have power to consider all the questions of fact and law that are relevant to the case before it’. (69) In the context of the review of administrative action, the Court has also held that the requirement of laid down in the second paragraph …

… The relevant part of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ 2012 C 326/391, provides as follows: . Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial “... 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. ...” THE LAW I. PRELIMINARY ISSUES A. The Government’s preliminary objection 52. …

… The relevant provision of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 27 June 1981, CAB/LEG/67/3 rev. 5, 21 I.L.M. 58 (1982), provides as follows: 7 “1. Every individual shall have the right to have his cause heard. This comprises: a. the right to an appeal to competent national organs against acts of violating his fundamental rights as recognized and guaranteed by conventions, laws, regulations and customs in force; ...” IV. EUROPEAN UNION LAW 51. …

… (2) of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU) on the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial provides: “Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and tribunal ... Everyone shall have the possibility of being advised, defended and represented.” …

… According to the explanations referred to in 52(7) of the , the second paragraph of Article corresponds to Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. The explanations state that, in all respects other than their scope, the guarantees afforded by the Convention apply in a similar way to the Union. 77.   …

… of the , entitled ‘Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial’ states as follows in its first two paragraphs: ‘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. …

… I will then explain why the first paragraph of Article 14 of Directive 2010/24 must be interpreted as being subject to compliance with the sequence laid down for cooperation set out in Directive 2010/24, under which information exchange must precede notification of a claim, which must in turn precede the issue of a uniform instrument permitting enforcement under 12 of Directive 2010/24. II. Legal framework A. of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 4. …

… The latter must implement that protection in accordance with the principles of and set out in of the . 17 The referring court states, in that regard, that the of judicial bodies depends on the guarantees that attach to their members’ status, including in terms of remuneration. 18 In those circumstances the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Supreme Administrative Court) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the …

… , applicable both to Courts of the European Union and national courts. 16 According to the referring court, the effective judicial protection of the rights stemming from the EU legal order is ensured, under the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, primarily by the national courts. …

… European in origin, on the ground that those requirements were imposed on the Portuguese Government by EU decisions granting, in particular, financial assistance to that Member State. 15 In that regard, the referring court observes that the discretion which the Portuguese State has in implementing its budgetary policy guidelines, acknowledged by the EU institutions, does not relieve it, however, of its obligation to respect the general principles of EU law, which include the principle of judicial …