search

… 13(1) of Directive 2008/115, the third-country national concerned must be afforded an effective remedy to appeal against or seek review of decisions related to return, as referred to in 12(1) of that directive, before a competent judicial or administrative authority or a competent body composed of members who are and who enjoy safeguards of . 46 The characteristics of that remedy must be determined in accordance with of the , under which everyone whose …

… residence permit provided for by national law, and, in so doing, has brought to an end the suspension of the enforcement of a return decision previously adopted in the context of a procedure for international protection, to raise of its own motion any infringement of the principle of non-refoulement resulting from the implementation of the latter decision, on the basis of the material in the file brought to its attention, as supplemented or clarified following adversarial proceedings. 45 Under …

… Rules which define, in particular, both conduct amounting to disciplinary offences and the penalties actually applicable, provide for the involvement of an independent body in accordance with a procedure fully safeguarding the rights enshrined in and 48 of the , in particular the rights of the defence, and lay down the possibility of bringing legal proceedings challenging the disciplinary bodies’ decisions constitute a set of guarantees that are essential for safeguarding the …

… Furthermore, since the prospect of opening a disciplinary investigation is, as such, liable to exert pressure on those who have the task of adjudicating in a dispute, it is essential that a body competent to conduct investigations and bring disciplinary proceedings, including by proposing the opening of proceedings of that nature, should act objectively and in the performance of its duties and, to that end, be free from any external influence. (16) 36. …

… of the , is the right of every person to be heard by an and tribunal previously established by law. …

… established by law, enshrined in the second paragraph of of the . …

… of the , on account of systemic or generalised deficiencies so far as concerns the and of that Member State’s judiciary (see, to that effect, judgment of 22 February 2022, Openbaar Ministerie (Tribunal established by law in the issuing Member State), C-562/21 PPU and C-563/21 PPU, EU:C:2022:100, paragraphs 52 and 66 and the case-law cited). 79 If that is the case, the competent authority of the executing Member State must, as a second step, determine, specifically …

… and of national judges and effective judicial protection in the fields covered by EU law, within the meaning of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU and Article of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 16 The role of the Judges of the General Court is precisely to ensure such effective judicial protection. …

… In addition, under the third subparagraph of Article 19(2) TEU and the second paragraph of Article 254 TFEU, those judges must also satisfy the requirement of , which cannot be understood as having a more limited scope than that arising, for national judges, from the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, as interpreted by the Court of Justice. 17 As regards, in particular, decisions appointing judges, the referring court submits that both the case-law of the Court of Justice, arising …

… the third subparagraph of Article 19(2) TEU and the second paragraph of Article 254 TFEU, in particular concerning the impact of those provisions on the national procedures for proposing candidates for the office of Judge of the General Court. 15 That court submits that the case-law of the Court of Justice, resulting in particular from the judgment of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses (C-64/16, EU:C:2018:117), recognised that there is a link between the requirements of …

… 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU - of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Effective judicial protection - and court - Objective test of impartiality) I. …

… That court therefore wonders whether national rules which allow the same court to be both judge and defendant in the same case meet the requirements of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU for effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law and of the second paragraph of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) for an and court. 18. …

… That requirement, which is a general principle of EU law, (11) is today embedded in both the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU and of the , of which the referring court requested an interpretation. 26. …

… The requirements of the second paragraph of of the 60. The guarantees of access to an and tribunal previously established by law laid down in the second paragraph of of the and, in particular, those which determine what constitutes a tribunal and how it is composed, represent the cornerstone of the right to a fair trial. (29) 61. …

… There was therefore considered to be a real risk that the conviction was not handed down in a fair hearing by an and tribunal previously established by law within the meaning of the second paragraph of of the . 12. …

… It appears that the French court therefore concluded that there was a risk that the convicted person would serve a sentence which had not been imposed by an and tribunal previously established by law, within the meaning of the second paragraph of of the . 59. However, do those circumstances actually give rise to a real risk of infringement of the second paragraph of of the ? 1. …

… of the . 53. …

… a general principle of EU law now enshrined in of the ’. (34) 65. …

… with applicable national provisions as well as with the requirements of an and tribunal previously established by law, thereby ensuring effective judicial protection as enshrined in the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of Article 2 TEU and taking due account of Article of the . …

… The Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku (District Court, Białystok) thus decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: ‘Should 2 of the Treaty on European Union, which defines the values on which the European Union is based with regard to respect for the rule of law, and the second subparagraph of 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, in conjunction with of the of Fundamental Rights of the European …

… Union, which requires Member States to ensure effective legal protection, which is based on the right of access to an and tribunal, be interpreted as meaning that the principle of judicial independence precludes provisions of national legislation which, for the purpose of limiting government spending, waives a mechanism for setting judges’ pay on the basis of objective criteria that are independent of arbitrary interference by the executive and legislative authorities, resulting …

… 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. …