search

… and the case-law cited). 40 The statement of reasons required by 296 TFEU and 41(2)(c) of the must be appropriate to the nature of the act at issue and to the context in which it was adopted. …

… Furthermore, the items of evidence contained in the second WK pack - although, for the most part, these pre-date the maintaining acts of September 2022 - were not relied upon when those acts were adopted. 37 The Council, supported by the Commission, disputes the applicant’s arguments. 38 According to settled case-law, the right to effective judicial protection, set out in of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’), requires that the person concerned must …

… of the requires, inter alia, that the Courts of the European Union ensure that the decision by way of which restrictive measures were adopted or maintained, which affects the person or entity concerned individually, is taken on a sufficiently solid factual basis. …

… Accordingly, given the inconsistencies between the criteria referred to, it is impossible for the applicant to understand the reasons for his listing. 33 The Council disputes those arguments. 34 According to settled case-law, the right to effective judicial protection, which is affirmed in of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’), requires that the person concerned must be able to ascertain the reasons upon which the decision taken in relation to him or …

… of the requires, inter alia, that the Courts of the European Union ensure that the decision by which restrictive measures were adopted or maintained, which affects the person or entity concerned individually, is taken on a sufficiently solid factual basis. …

… The first plea in law, alleging breach of the right to effective judicial protection and infringement of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and infringement of the obligation to state reasons and of 296 TFEU 30 In the first place, the applicant claims that the formal statement of reasons for the inclusion of his name on the lists at issue is either almost absent or contradictory, or does not comply with the obligation of specificity borne by the Council …

… and 48 of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’) (see judgments of 3 February 2021, Klymenko v Council, T-258/20, EU:T:2021:52, paragraph 64 and the case-law cited, and of 9 June 2021, Yanukovych v Council, T-302/19, not published, EU:T:2021:333, paragraphs 73 to 80). 86 The effectiveness of the judicial review guaranteed by of the requires that, as part of the review of the lawfulness of the grounds which are the basis of the decision to include …

… Yanukovych, including the fundamental right to have his case heard within a reasonable time by an and tribunal, were respected in the criminal proceedings on which the Council relied. This is demonstrated in particular by the decisions of the Supreme Anti-Corruption Court of Ukraine. …

… In that regard, it should be noted that proceedings No [confidential] were still at the stage of the pre-trial investigation, which had been transferred to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau a short time before, 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. 117 The second paragraph of of the , which is the standard by reference to which the Council must …

… and 48 of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’) (see judgments of 3 February 2021, Klymenko v Council, T-258/20, EU:T:2021:52, paragraph 64 and the case-law cited, and of 9 June 2021, Yanukovych v Council, T-303/19, not published, EU:T:2021:334, paragraph 74 and the case-law cited). 88 The effectiveness of the judicial review guaranteed by of the requires that, as part of the review of the lawfulness of the grounds which are the basis of the …

… In that regard, it should be noted that proceedings No [confidential] and proceedings No [confidential] were still at the stage of the pre-trial investigation, which had been transferred to the National Anti-Corruption Bureau a short time before, 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. 120 The second paragraph of of the , which is the standard by reference …

… The information on the Council’s file shows that the rights of defence and the right to effective judicial protection of Mr Yanukovych, including the fundamental right to have his case heard within a reasonable time by an and tribunal, were respected in the criminal proceedings on which the Council relied. …

… - Presumption of innocence - - Fines - Basic amount - Value of sales - 23(2) and (3) of Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Obligation to state reasons - Amending decision supplementing the statement of reasons - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Unlimited jurisdiction) In Case T-106/17, JPMorgan Chase & Co., established in New York, New York (United States), JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, established in Columbus, Ohio (United States), J.P. …

… JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (Tenth Chamber, Extended Composition) 20 December 2023 (*) (1) (Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Euro Interest Rate Derivatives sector - Decision establishing an infringement of 101 TFEU and 53 of the EEA Agreement - Manipulation of the Euribor Interbank Benchmark Rates - Exchange of confidential information - Restriction of competition by object - Single and continuous infringement - ‘Hybrid’ procedure staggered over time …

… ’) and the rate risk, expectations as to the future evolution of the interest rate benchmarks (in this case Euribor and EONIA), his or her ability to find cover quickly on the market and the level of counterparty risk. 41 The most frequent EIRDs are forward rate agreements (‘FRAs’), interest rate swaps, interest rate options and interest rate futures (recitals 4 to 10 of the contested decision). 42 The Euribor rate is based on the individual quotes by the banks belonging to the panel made up of …

… Rights of the European Union (‘the ’) on account of the failure to state adequate reasons for the contested decision; - alleging, third, infringement of the right to effective judicial protection guaranteed by (1) of the ; - based, fourth, on a plea of illegality in respect of 4 to 9 of and Annex I to Delegated Regulation 2015/63, alleging infringement of the right to effective judicial protection guaranteed by (1) of the and breach of the principle …

… (a) The first part, concerning an alleged breach of the principle of effective judicial protection 31 The applicant submits that 4 to 9 of and Annex I to Delegated Regulation 2015/63 breach the principle of effective judicial protection, as enshrined in (1) of the . …

… of the , the parties to a case must have the right to examine all the documents or observations submitted to the court for the purpose of influencing its decision, and to comment on them. …

… The resolution reiterated that the of the judiciary was enshrined in of the and 6 of the Convention, and was an essential requirement of the democratic principle of the separation of powers, which was also reflected in Article 10 of the Polish Constitution. …

… By the third plea, the Commission argues that the Constitutional Court no longer offers the guarantees of an and tribunal previously established by law for the purposes of the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, in conjunction with of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, (i) as a result of manifest irregularities in the appointments to judicial positions at the Constitutional Court in December 2015 in flagrant breach of Polish constitutional …

… The authority taking decisions on the selection and career of judges should be of the executive and legislative powers. With a view to guaranteeing its , at least half of the members of the authority should be judges chosen by their peers. . …

… JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) 14 December 2023 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data - Regulation (EU) 2016/679 - 5 - Principles relating to that processing - 24 - Accountability of the controller - 32 - Measures implemented to ensure security of processing - Assessment of the appropriateness of such measures - Scope of judicial review - Taking of evidence - 82 - Right to compensation …

… Nikolova, acting as Agents, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 27 April 2023, gives the following Judgment 1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of 5(2), 24 and 32 and 82(1) to (3) of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive …

… Legal context 3 Recitals 4, 10, 11, 74, 76, 83, 85 and 146 of the GDPR are worded as follows: ‘(4) … This Regulation respects all fundamental rights and observes the freedoms and principles recognised in the [ of Fundamental Rights of the European Union] as enshrined in the Treaties, in particular the respect for private and family life, home and communications, the protection of personal data, … the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial … … (10) In order to ensure a consistent …

… may be called upon to rule on questions concerning the application or interpretation of EU law are in a position to ensure such effective judicial protection, maintaining their is essential, as confirmed by the second paragraph of of the , which refers to access to an ‘ and ’ tribunal as one of the requirements linked to the fundamental right to an effective remedy. …

… 19(1) TEU - of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - - Approval of the agreement by the court - Conditions - Designation of an ad hoc court - Consent of the other accused persons) 1. …

… In any event, it cannot, in my view, be inferred from the information contained in point 64 of this Opinion that the second subparagraph of 19(1) TEU, read in the light of of the , must be interpreted as precluding the national legislation at issue. …

… They argued that the Constitutional Court no longer served as an and judicial authority and that the proceedings before it could not be considered an effective remedy for the purposes of 35 of the Convention. They referred to the Court’s case-law, in particular the judgment in Xero Flor w Polsce sp. z o.o. v. Poland (no. 4907/18, 7 May 2021). 45. …

… They complained that 1 § 1 of the Family and Custody Code was incompatible with of the Constitution, in conjunction with 31 § 3 and 32 §§ 1 and 2 and with 30 in so far as “it made it impossible for two persons of the same sex to marry and did not at least provide for any other form of legal recognition of relationships between two persons of the same sex”. …

… They relied on the same grounds, namely that 1 § 1 of the Family and Custody Code was incompatible with of the Constitution, in conjunction with 31 § 3 and 32 §§ 1 and 2 and with 30 in so far as “it [did] not allow for marriage between two persons of the same sex, or at least [did] not provide for any legal form of institutionalisation of unions formed by persons of the same sex”. …