search

… That also follows from the right to an effective judicial remedy, enshrined in of the . …

… Box Promotion and Others, C-357/19, C-379/19, C-547/19, C-811/19 and C-840/19, EU:C:2021:1034, paragraph 219 and the case-law cited). 83 To that end, maintaining the of bodies which may be called upon to rule on questions concerning the application or interpretation of EU law 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 remedy …

… 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with the second paragraph of of [the ], be interpreted as meaning that it is per se or under certain conditions an infringement of the obligation incumbent on Member States to provide effective remedies sufficient to ensure judicial review for the functions of an authority which can impose disciplinary penalties on judges and has powers to collect data relating to their assets and liabilities to be indefinitely extended after the …

… that prevents national courts from examining whether there is compliance with EU requirements concerning an and tribunal previously established by law within the meaning of 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with of the ?’ …

… According to the Explanations relating to the of Fundamental Rights (OJ 2007 C 303, p. 17), 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 (see judgments in W.Ż. …

… I recall, however, that the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with of the , makes no distinction between supreme courts and ordinary courts. The fundamental requirements of , and being a tribunal previously established by law apply uniformly to all the courts of the Member States, without consideration of the level of jurisdiction or of the hierarchical rank of the court concerned. () 73. …

… 1(1) of Directive 89/665, it is the latter directive which lays down the rules with which Member States are required to comply in order to ensure that decisions taken by contracting authorities can be reviewed effectively. 63 It should be borne in mind, first, that Directive 89/665 is intended to ensure full respect for the right to an effective remedy and to have access to an and tribunal, enshrined in the first and second paragraphs of of the of Fundamental …

… of the conditions laid down in 43 of that directive. …

… (see, to that effect, judgment of 12 May 2022, Comune di Lerici, C-719/20, EU:C:2022:372, paragraphs 41 and 43). 56 That requirement, which, under 43(1)(d)(ii) of Directive 2014/23, must be regarded as also applying to concessions, is, however, explained by the fact that, although a concession was initially the subject of an in-house award, within the meaning set out in paragraphs and 48 of the present judgment, following a procedure not based on qualitative selection criteria such as …

… 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 . 55. …

… of the , I believe that the Court’s response may refer solely to the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU. …

… In the context of the crisis surrounding the rule of law in Europe, abundant case-law of the Court of Justice - which has been the subject of much debate - has established a general outline of the requirements for and of courts arising from the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’). 2. …

… the second plea, it submits that the Board of Appeal: - had a conflict of interest; - lacked ; - misunderstood, misinterpreted or failed to examine: - the findings set out in the decision of the Cancellation Division and in the decision of 25 May 2020; - documents or pleadings of the parties; - infringed: - 41 of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’); - 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms …

… JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Third Chamber) 2 April 2025 (*) (EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU figurative mark Swisse - Absolute grounds for invalidity - 51(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now 59(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Mark of such a nature as to deceive the public - 7(1)(g) of Regulation No 40/94 (now 7(1)(g) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Bad faith - Right to be heard - 41 of the of Fundamental Rights) In …

… Therefore, in invalidity proceedings, EUIPO does not carry out the same examination as at the time of registration of the trade mark in question. Lastly, Article 166 of Regulation 2017/1001 expressly enshrines the of the Boards of Appeal. 48 That complaint must therefore be rejected. 49 In the second place, as regards, first, the applicant’s argument that the Board of Appeal disregarded the fact that the parties were in agreement that the word element of the contested mark could be …

… GRAND CHAMBER CASE OF SHIPS WASTE OIL COLLECTOR B.V. AND OTHERS v. THE NETHERLANDS (Application no. 2799/16 and 3 others – see appended list) JUDGMENT Art 8 • Correspondence • Transmission and use in competition law proceedings of data lawfully obtained through telephone tapping in criminal investigations • Transmission of intercept data for further use by another law-enforcement authority constituted a separate interference with Article 8 rights, distinct from original interception • Minimum safeguards …

… market price. . …

… and 4 to 6 of that decision. 2. …

… Secondly, as regards subjective , I would point out that this is linked to and seeks to ensure a level playing field for the parties to the proceedings and their respective interests with regard to the subject matter of those proceedings. That aspect requires objectivity and the absence of any interest in the content of the expert’s report. (53) 83. …

… Were that not so, the right of access to justice and the jurisdiction conferred by 6 of Directive 2003/4 on the and bodies established by law and the courts of law would depend on the interpretation of the conditions for access to environmental information followed by the national authorities. As the Commissioner submitted, the mechanism for ensuring access to justice could be undermined by the simple act of a public authority deeming a request to be invalid. . …

… Under 6(1) of Directive 2003/4, Member States must ensure that any ‘applicant who considers that his request for information has been ignored, wrongfully refused … inadequately answered or otherwise not dealt with in accordance with the provisions of 3, 4 or 5, has access to a procedure in which the acts or omissions of the public authority concerned can be reconsidered by that or another public authority or reviewed administratively by an and body established …

… In other respects, neither 2(5) nor 3(1) of Directive 2003/4 imposes conditions relating to form or validity for the submission of a request. The term ‘request’ must be understood broadly as any request submitted in accordance with 3(1) of that directive. 38. …

… 6 and the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, interpreted in the light of of the , the first subparagraph of 4(1) of the Framework Directive and 31 of the EECC. 24 In the present case, 1(1037) of Law No 205/2017. 25 According to the settled case-law of the Court, 4 of the Framework Directive is an expression of the principle of effective judicial protection safeguarded by of the , pursuant to which it is for the courts of …

… of the national regulatory authorities - of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - - Effective judicial protection - National legislation limiting the effects of actions for annulment) Introduction 1. …

… It is in the light of that provision, interpreted in the light of of the , that the present question must be assessed, (25) without it being necessary, in the circumstances of the present case, to extend that assessment to the other provisions referred to by the referring court, in particular 6 and 19(1) TEU. (26) 31. …

… JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Seventh Chamber, Extended Composition) 19 March 2025 (*) (1) (Dumping - Import of superabsorbent polymers originating in the Republic of Korea - Regulation (EU) 2022/547 - Definitive anti-dumping duty - Article 3(2), (3), (5), (6) and (7) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 - Article 9(4) of Regulation 2016/1036 - Determination of injury - Examination of the effect of the imports on prices for like products sold on the EU market - Analysis of price undercutting - Application …