search

… She relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, the relevant parts of which read as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by . ...” Admissibility 19. The Court notes that the application is neither manifestly ill-founded nor inadmissible on any other grounds listed in Article 35 of the Convention. It must therefore be declared admissible. …

… This conclusion was the starting point for its assessment of whether the Disciplinary Chamber could be considered an “ and by ”: “61. …

… They complained that the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court, which examined their appeals against the resolutions of the NCJ, had not been an “ and by ”. They alleged a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE FACTS 2. The applicants were born in 1979 and 1966 respectively and live in Siemianowice Śląskie and Lublin. They were represented by Ms S. Gregorczyk‑Abram and Ms M. …

… The Supreme Court concluded: “Consequently, the necessity of meeting the Convention standard of fair trial in terms of access to an and by requires, in application of Article 91 section 2 of the Polish Constitution, a refusal to apply the provisions of Article 29 § 2 and 3 of the Act on the Supreme Court and, as a further consequence, quashing the decision appealed against, so that in further proceedings the convicted person is entitled to guarantees …

… The applicant complained that his right of access to a court had been breached because he could not have his challenge against the parliamentary decision terminating his service as a member and President of the CSA examined on the merits by an and by . …

… He alleged in particular that his challenge against a parliamentary decision terminating his service as a member and president of a central public authority, which had had negative effects of a pecuniary and non-pecuniary nature for him, had not been examined on the merits by an and by . THE FACTS 2. The applicant was born in 1949 and lives in Bucharest. He was represented before the Court by Mr O.M. Țibuleac, a lawyer practising in Bucharest. 3. …

… In the determination of ... any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... …

… 40 The referring court considers that the answer to the questions thus addressed to it will depend, inter alia, on whether a judge appointed in such circumstances constitutes an and by , within the meaning of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, Article 267 TFEU, the second subparagraph of Article 47 of the Charter, and Article 6(1) ECHR. 41 According to the referring court, the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, requires Member States …

… and by to be able, in accordance with a procedure that fully safeguards the rights enshrined in Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter, to review the validity of that decision and that of the decision not to adjudicate of a body such as the KRS concerning the challenge brought against that transfer decision. 121 In the present case, the referring court, seeks, in essence, as is apparent from paragraph 71 of the present judgment, to determine whether, in the context …

… resolution did not constitute an independent body. 120 Although it does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, hearing, as in the case, a request for a preliminary ruling, to confirm the extent to which those circumstances, or certain of them, have in fact been established, it remains, in any event, in order to ensure the possibility of an effective judicial remedy in respect of a decision to transfer a judge without consent, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, necessary for an …

… This conclusion was the starting point for its assessment of whether the Disciplinary Chamber could be considered an “ and by ”: “61. …

… The applicant, who is a barrister, complained that the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court that dealt with her case had not been an and “ by ” and alleged a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. THE FACTS 2. The applicant was born in 1980 and lives in Gdynia. Having been granted legal aid, she was represented by Ms M. Gąsiorowska, a lawyer practising in Warszawa. 3. …

… In particular, for the purpose of this Recommendation, lawyers’ rights include, inter alia: - the right to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by . This does not preclude lawyers from asking that the hearing be heard in camera.” The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights 135. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms Dunja Mijatović carried out a visit to Poland from 11 to 15 March 2019. …

… The applicants relied on Article 6 § 1 of the Convention which reads, in so far as relevant, as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” Alleged violation of right of access to a court as a result of the 2016 legislative amendments Admissibility (a) The parties’ submissions 39. …

… In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an and by ... ... 3. Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights: ... …

… and by . 162 Thus, the first complaint in the main action raises the question whether, in order to comply with their obligation under the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter, to guarantee that the national courts coming within their judicial system in the fields covered by EU law meet the requirements inherent in effective judicial protection, including the requirements of independence, the Member States must …

… irregular. 161 It is apparent from the Republic of Poland’s assertions, as set out in paragraphs 158 and 159 of the present order, that that Member State is disputing not the fact that those national provisions prohibit the national courts from carrying out such verification but the fact that such a prohibition, which is consistent with the Polish constitutional provisions, may be regarded as a breach of its obligations under the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU to guarantee the right to an …

… Article 6 § 1 of the Convention reads as follows: “In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ... everyone is entitled to a fair ... hearing ... by an and by .” The parties’ submissions 29. …