search

… APPLICATION OF 41 OF THE CONVENTION A. Damage B. Costs and expenses C. Default interest OPERATIVE PROVISIONS PARTLY CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE ŠIMÁČKOVÁ A “tribunal established by law”? An “ and ” tribunal? …

… While this type of arbitration was not prohibited, the arbitral tribunal had to afford the safeguards under 6 § 1 of the Convention, in particular those of and (Mutu and Pechstein, cited above, §§ 95 and 114 et seq.). …

… Examining whether the CAS could be regarded as an ‘ and tribunal established by law’ within the meaning of that provision, the ECtHR held that the CAS had the appearance of a tribunal established by law and that it was genuinely and (Mutu and Pechstein, cited above, §§ 149 and 159), which it has had cause recently to confirm (Platini v. Switzerland (dec.), no. 526/18, § 65, 11 February 2020). 5.1.3. …

… EU law prohibits any discrimination based on any ground, explicitly including sexual orientation (see 10 and 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, in force in Poland since 1 May 2004, and 21 § 1 of the EU of Fundamental Rights, in force in Poland since 1 December 2009). …

… According to that proposal, 53 § 2a (6) and 119 § 1 (see paragraphs 31 and 36-38 above) (as well as 256 § 1 and 257 – on hate speech) of the Criminal Code should be amended to include, inter alia, hatred motivated by sexual orientation among the circumstances considered aggravating for acts of violence, uttering threats, incitement to hatred and hate speech. In addition, where relevant, the word “because” should be replaced by the term “in connection with”. …

… Treating hate motivated violence on an equal footing with cases lacking any such overtones would be tantamount to turning a blind eye to the specific nature of acts which were particularly destructive of fundamental human rights. . …

… GRAND CHAMBER CASE OF UKRAINE AND THE NETHERLANDS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 8019/16, 43800/14, 28525/20 and 11055/22) JUDGMENT (Merits) Art 33 • Inter-State application • Multiple, flagrant and unprecedented Convention violations by the respondent State in Ukraine • Downing of flight MH17 • Administrative practices of military attacks on Ukrainian territory and of other acts in occupied areas in Ukraine and in Russian sovereign territory • Repeated violations officially tolerated by the Russian …

… 46 of Directive 2013/32 and of the for persons affected by decisions refusing applications for international protection. …

… Provisional text JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 3 July 2025 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Asylum policy - International protection - Common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection - Directive 2013/32/EU - 46 - of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - - Right to an effective remedy - Requirement of full and ex nunc examination of the appeal - Obligation to appear in person before the authority examining the appeal - Presumption …

… Katsimerou, acting as Agents, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 6 February 2025, gives the following Judgment 1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns, in essence, the interpretation of 46 of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60), read in the light of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European …

… 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. …

… of the corresponds. 59 Furthermore, in so far as the sets out rights corresponding to those guaranteed by the ECHR, 52(3) of the is intended to ensure the necessary consistency between the rights contained in the and the corresponding rights guaranteed by the ECHR, without that undermining the autonomy of EU law. …

… (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. …

… Provisional text JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (First Chamber) 3 July 2025 (*) (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - 273 - , first paragraph, of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to an effective remedy - Coercive administrative measure of sealing business premises - Application for suspension - Limited judicial review) In Case C-605/23, REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under 267 TFEU from …

… Drambozova, acting as Agents, after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 13 February 2025, gives the following Judgment 1 This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of the first paragraph of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’), read in conjunction with 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1; ‘the VAT Directive’). 2 …

… JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fourth Chamber) 3 July 2025 (*) (Appeal - Arbitration clause - Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration activities (2007-2013) - The SANAD project - Staff costs - Eligible costs - Request for recovery - Debit note - 41 of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principle of good administration - Substitution of grounds - of the of Fundamental Rights - Right to effective judicial protection …

… 40 The REA submits, as a preliminary point, that paragraphs 34 and 53 of the judgment under appeal do not infringe the right to effective judicial protection, within the meaning of of the , in so far as, first, paragraph 53 of that judgment sets out the reasons why the General Court considers that an infringement of 41 of the cannot, in principle, be validly relied on in the context of an action based on 272 TFEU and, second, paragraph 34 of that judgment …

… The first ground of appeal 36 The first ground of appeal is directed against paragraphs 34 and 53 of the judgment under appeal and alleges a breach of the right to effective judicial protection, within the meaning of of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’), in that the General Court failed to take account of the asymmetry between the parties to the grant agreement and refused to apply the principle of good administration, enshrined in 41 of the …

… 20 and 21 and 49(1) of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the ’). 2 The requests have been made in two sets of proceedings between, on the one hand, Makeleio EPE and Zougla G.R. …

… In particular: … (e) it shall impose the administrative penalties and measures referred to in 4(1) of [Law 2328/1995] and in 12 and 15(3) of [Law 2644/1998] …’ Law No 2644/1998 16 Under 1(1) of Law 2644/1998: ‘The provision of pay-radio and pay-television services is subject, in accordance with 15 of the Constitution of the Hellenic Republic, to the direct control of the State and constitutes a public service aimed at supplying objective and information …

… grounds referred to in 21 of the ; (b) public provocation to commit a terrorist offence as set out in 5 of Directive (EU) 2017/541 [of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA and amending Council Decision 2005/671/JHA (OJ 2017 L 88, p. 6)].’ 8 9(1) of Directive 2010/13 provides: ‘Member States shall ensure that audiovisual commercial communications provided by media service …

… 101 TFEU. 69 According to settled case-law, the principle of effective judicial protection is a general principle of EU law to which expression is now given by of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (judgment of 10 July 2014, Telefónica and Telefónica de España v Commission, C-295/12 P, EU:C:2014:2062, paragraph 40 and the case-law cited). …

… coordination of the competitive behaviour of undertakings that remain .’ …

… To the extent that the creation of a joint venture constituting a concentration pursuant to 3 has as its object or effect the coordination of the competitive behaviour of undertakings that remain , such coordination shall be appraised in accordance with the criteria of [101](1) and (3) [TFEU], with a view to establishing whether or not the operation is compatible with the common market. 5. …

… However, by its finding in paragraph 31 of the judgment under appeal, the General Court suggested that the appellant had not relied on any specific circumstances, thereby distorting the appellant’s arguments. 46 By the third part of the first ground of appeal, the appellant submits that the right to an effective remedy and to in the context of a fair trial, enshrined in Article of the of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, means that the General Court must acquaint itself …

… The appeal 22 In support of its appeal, the appellant relies on six grounds of appeal, alleging breach of the obligation to state reasons, distortion of the facts and breach of its procedural rights (first ground of appeal), misapplication of the fourth paragraph of 263 TFEU (second ground), misapplication of 101 TFEU (third ground), misapplication of 3 of Regulation No 139/2004 (fourth ground), misapplication of 2 of that regulation (fifth ground) and breach of the …

… The decision at issue 12 On 26 February 2019, the Commission adopted the decision at issue by which operation M.8871 was declared compatible with the internal market during the examination phase provided for by 6(1)(b) of Regulation No 139/2004 and by 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) of 2 May 1992 (OJ 1994 L 1, p. 3). …