Tag: european arrest warrant

Summaries of judgments: L.G. (Continued holding of a judicial office) | GN (Ground for refusal based on the best interests of the child)

On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgments1 Comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2023, L.G. (Continued holding of a judicial office), Case C‑718/21 ,EU:C:2023:1015

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Concept of ‘court or tribunal’ – Criteria – Izba Kontroli Nadzwyczajnej i Spraw Publicznych (Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs) of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Reference for a preliminary ruling from a panel of judges without the status of an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Inadmissibility

Facts

In Poland, judges who wish to continue to perform their duties after reaching the age of retirement are required to declare their wish to do so to the Krajowej Radzie Sądownictwa (National Council of the Judiciary, the ‘KRS’).

In 2020, L.G., a judge within the Sąd Okręgowy w K. (Regional Court, K., Poland), notified the KRS of his wish to continue to perform his duties beyond the date of his 65th birthday. The KRS declared that there was no need to rule on the application, after finding that it had been lodged after the expiry of the time limit imposed by law. Hearing an appeal brought by L.G., the Sąd Najwyższy (Izba Kontroli Nadzwyczajnej i Spraw Publicznych) (Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court, Poland), turned to the CJEU to request clarification regarding the principles of the irremovability of judges and judicial independence as enshrined in EU law.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: L.G. (Continued holding of a judicial office) | GN (Ground for refusal based on the best interests of the child)” →

Summaries of judgments: Asociaţia «Forumul Judecătorilor din România» | Juan

On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 7 September 2023, Asociaţia «Forumul Judecătorilor din România», Case C‑216/21, EU:C:2023:628

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Decision 2006/928/EC – Mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption – Article 2 TEU – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Rule of law – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 47 – Independence of judges – National legislation altering the scheme for the promotion of judges

Facts

In 2019, the Consiliul Superior al Magistraturii (Superior Council of Magistracy, Romania) (CSM) altered the procedure for the effective promotion of judges to the regional courts and the courts of appeal by replacing the old written exams with an assessment of candidates’ work and conduct during their last three years of service. The Asociaţia «Forumul Judecătorilor din România» (‘Forum of Judges of Romania’ Association) and YN brought an action before the referring court, the Curtea de Apel Ploiești (Court of Appeal, Ploieşti, Romania), for partial annulment of that decision.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Asociaţia «Forumul Judecătorilor din România» | Juan” →

Summaries of judgments: Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others (European arrest warrant issued against a third-country national) | Lin

On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 June 2023, Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others (European arrest warrant issued against a third-country national), Case C‑700/21, EU:C:2023:444

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant – Article 4(6) – Objective of social rehabilitation – Third-country nationals staying or residing on the territory of the executing Member State – Equal treatment – Article 20 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Facts

On 13 February 2012, the Judecătoria Brașov (Court of First Instance, Brașov, Romania) issued a European arrest warrant (EAW) against O.G., a Moldovan national, for the purposes of executing a custodial sentence.

Finding that O.G. had proof that met the legal standard necessary to demonstrate his stable family and employment situation in Italy, the Corte d’appello di Bologna (Court of Appeal, Bologna, Italy) raised before the Corte costituzionale (Constitutional Court, Italy) questions as to the constitutionality of Article 18a of Law No 69/2005 (GURI No 98 of 29 April 2005).

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Presidente del Consiglio dei Ministri and Others (European arrest warrant issued against a third-country national) | Lin” →

Summaries of judgments: E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness) | TAP Portugal (Death of the co-pilot)

On By officialblogunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of 18 April 2023 , E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness), Case C‑699/21, EU:C:2023:295

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Article 23(4) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Grounds for non-execution – Article 4(3) TEU – Duty of sincere cooperation – Postponement of the execution of the European arrest warrant – Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment – Serious, chronic and potentially irreversible illness – Risk of serious harm to health affecting the person concerned by the European arrest warrant

Facts

On 9 September 2019, the Općinski sud u Zadru (Municipal Court, Zadar, Croatia) issued a European arrest warrant (EAW) against E.D.L., who resides in Italy, for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution in Croatia.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: E.D.L. (Ground for refusal based on illness) | TAP Portugal (Death of the co-pilot)” →

Summaries of judgments: Openbaar Ministerie | BPC Lux 2 and Others

On By revistaunioIn Summaries of judgmentsLeave a comment 
Summaries of judgments made in collaboration with the Portuguese judge and référendaire of the CJEU (Nuno Piçarra and Sophie Perez)

 ▪

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022, X and Y v Openbaar Ministerie, Joined Cases C-562/21 PPU and C-563/21 PPU, EU:C:2022:100

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 1(3) – Surrender procedures between Member States – Conditions for execution – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Second paragraph of Article 47 – Fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law – Systemic or generalised deficiencies – Two-step examination – Criteria for application – Obligation of the executing judicial authority to determine, specifically and precisely, whether there are substantial grounds for believing that the person in respect of whom a European arrest warrant has been issued, if surrendered, runs a real risk of breach of his or her fundamental right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law

Facts

Two European arrest warrants (‘EAWs’) were issued in April 2021 by Polish courts against two Polish nationals for the purposes, respectively, of executing a custodial sentence and of conducting a criminal prosecution. The persons concerned were in the Netherlands and did not consent to their surrender.

The Rechtbank Amsterdam (District Court, Amsterdam, Netherlands) noted that, since 2017, there have been in Poland systemic or generalised deficiencies affecting the right to a fair trial, and in particular the right to a tribunal previously established by law, resulting, inter alia, from the fact that Polish judges are appointed on application of the Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (the Polish National Council of the Judiciary; ‘the KRS’). The referring court furthermore noted that, according to the resolution adopted in 2020 by the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland), the KRS, since the entry into force of a law on judicial reform on 17 January 2018, is no longer an independent body. In so far as the judges appointed on application of the KRS may have participated in the criminal proceedings that led to the conviction of one of the persons concerned or may be called upon to hear the criminal case of the other person concerned, the referring court considered that there was a real risk that those persons, if surrendered, would suffer a breach of their fundamental right to a tribunal previously established by law.

Continue reading “Summaries of judgments: Openbaar Ministerie | BPC Lux 2 and Others” →

LM judgment – effective judicial protection as general principle and fundamental right

On By officialblogunioIn Essays2 Comments

6284654174_aba5409a28_o

 by Joana Covelo de Abreu, Editor

▪

2018 is the year when effective judicial protection undertakes several new developments.

In this sense, the Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses’ judgment (ASJP) set the tone to great developments under effective judicial protection dimension concerning the independence of courts. In this decision, the Court of Justice understood effective judicial protection as not only a fundamental right, but also a general principle of EU law. In fact, the Court of Justice preferred to set this jurisprudence based on the general principle – as enshrined Article 19 (1) (2) TFEU – because that was the way to liberate effective judicial protection from the methodical difficulties brought by Article 51 CFREU.

In this decision, the Court of Justice reasoned based on Article 2 TEU (concerning the values of the EU), Article 4 (3) TEU (principle of sincere cooperation) and Article 19 (1) TEU, emphasising Article 19 (1) TEU as a “concrete expression to the value of the rule of law stated in Article 2 TEU” and acknowledging the integrated nature of the EU judiciary system – composed both by ECJ as EU organic court and national courts as EU functioning courts.

But when we thought the Court of Justice had already enough developed effective judicial protection, we are surprised with the LM judgment (case C-216/18 PPU).

This decision, issued on the July 25th 2018, was developed under a preliminary reference made in order to interpret the limits concerning the enforcement of three European Arrest Warrants. They aimed at arresting and surrendering LM to Polish authorities for the purpose of conducting criminal prosecutions (concerning trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances).
Continue reading “LM judgment – effective judicial protection as general principle and fundamental right” →

Editorial of May 2018

On By officialblogunioIn EditorialsLeave a comment

2504979711_788a8ca2f5_o

 by Joana Whyte, Junior Editor and Associate Lawyer at SRS Advogados
▪


The German Court’s decision on Mr. Puigdemont’s EAW and its similarities to a Swiss Cheese

The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) represented one of the most important developments of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice whose creation and development with the Amsterdam Treaty became one of the European Union’s objectives.

The EAW abolished the traditional process of extradition and made it simpler for European Member States to request the arrest and surrender of a requested person for the purposes of conducting a criminal prosecution or executing a custodial sentence or detention order.

The EAW is the first concrete measure in the field of criminal law implementing the principle of mutual recognition which the European Council referred to in the 1999 Tampere European Council as the “cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters within the Union”.

According to the principle of mutual recognition, a decision adopted by a judicial authority of a Member State (the issuing Member State), on the grounds of its internal legislation, must be recognised, accepted and executed by the executing Member States’ judicial authorities, even though the same case, according to the executing Member States’ law, could lead to a different outcome.

The EAW also abolished the principle of double criminality for a list of 32 crimes established in Article 2(2) of the EAW’s Framework Decision (Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA).

This is fundamentally where the issue on Carles Puigdemont case arises.
Continue reading “Editorial of May 2018” →