Monitoring References to the Court of Justice of the European Union
Tag
8 case reports
A judge in Erfurt hearing a GDPR claim against Meta alone wants to refer questions to Luxembourg. German procedure says a single judge who meets a question of principle must hand the case to the three-judge chamber — which may then decline to refer. The judge asks whether Article 267 tolerates a rule that lets a court's own colleagues stand between it and the Court.
A Polish judge was released from her cases against the rules, and the replacement was drawn by a random-allocation system built by the Ministry of Justice whose source code nobody may inspect. Is a court composed that way still a tribunal established by law? The Warsaw Regional Court asks.
Bulgaria's Supreme Judicial Council sets the basic pay of judges in the middle ranks with no objective, predictable, stable or transparent rules to bind it. A Razgrad court asks whether Article 19(1) TEU tolerates that much discretion over a judge's salary.
By judgment of 26 July 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:597) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 27 September 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:725) the Court held that requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies before a data-protection claim reaches a court is compatible with Article 47 of the Charter if it causes no substantial delay or…
On 27 February 2018 the Grand Chamber ruled (ECLI:EU:C:2018:117) that Article 19(1) TEU obliges Member States to ensure that courts which may apply EU law meet the requirements of effective judicial protection, including independence — though Portugal's…
By judgment of 26 July 2017 (ECLI:EU:C:2017:593) the Court ruled, in the words of the operative part: “1.
By judgment of 19 October 2016 (ECLI:EU:C:2016:780) the Court held that the Framework Directive does not prevent a Member State from merging its telecoms regulator into a multi-sector authority, but dismissing the NRA's president and board before the end…