CJC Database

Hungary, Budapest Regional Court, 38.K.707.688/2020/23. (C-528/21), ordinary, 19 July 2021

Deciding court: Budapest Regional Court (Budapest High Court)

Topic: rule of law, right to a fair trial

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

Romania, Pitești Court of Appeal, Criminal Ruling No. 3/F-CC-DL, Case no. 722/46/2021, 07 June 2021, ECLI: ECLI:RO:CAPIT:2021:011.000003

Deciding court: Pitesti Court of Appeal, Criminal Secttion and Section for Minors and Family Cases

Topic: rule of law, independence of the judiciary

National Follow Up Of (when relevant):

ECtHR jurisprudence: Ninn-Hansen v. Denmark (dec.) - 28972/95Findlay v. The United Kingdom, 110/1995/616/706, 25.02.1997Parlov-Tkalčić v. Croatia - 24810/06. Judgment 22.12.2009; Case No. 42095/98, Daktaras v Lithuania, 10 October 2000; Moiseyev v. Russia - 62936/00. Judgment 9.10.2008 [Section I]

TRIIAL CASE

Italy, Tribunal of Milan, FR v. Ministero dell’Interno, ordinary instance, 9/5/2018

Deciding court: Tribunal of Milan

Topic: Impartiality (Conflict of Interest)Rule of law (Fair Trial/ Access to Justice)

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): The national case is a direct follow up of the CJEU order of 27 September 2018

ECtHR jurisprudence: Article 3 ECHRArticle 6 ECHRArticle 13 ECHRECtHR judgments:Gebremedhin v. France of 26 April 2007Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy of 23 February 2012Krombach v. France of 13 February 2001Annoni v. France of 14 November 2000

TRIIAL CASE

Romania, Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber), C-430/21 RS (Effect of the decisions of a constitutional court), ECLI:EU:C:2022:99, in connection with Romanian Constitutional Court, Decision no. 390/8 June 2021, published in the Official Monitor of Romania no. 612 of 22.06.2021

Deciding court: Court of Justice of the European Union / Romanian Constitutional Court

Topic: rule of law, independence of the judiciary

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): 3.7.1. The Judgment of the Court in the Case C-430/21 RS represents the response to the request made by a national ordinary court, Curtea de Apel Craiova (Court of Appeal, Craiova, Romania) as follow-up of the Decision no. 390/8 June 2021 of the Romanian Constitutional Court. 3.7.2. The Decision no. 390/8 June 2021 of the Romanian Constitutional Court is the follow-up of the CJEU (Grand Chamber) Judgment in Joined Cases C‑83/19, C‑127/19, C‑195/19, C‑291/19, C‑355/19 and C‑397/19, Asociatia Forumul Judecătorilor din România (AFJR) of 18 May 2021, ECLI:EU:C:2021:393. By this Decision, and notwithstanding the criteria proposed by the Grand Chamber in the aforementioned case, the Romanian Constitutional court found the legal dispositions concerning the Secția pentru Investigarea Infracțiunilor din Justiție (Section for the investigation of offences committed within the judicial system; ‘the SIIJ’), established within the Parchetul de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie (Public Prosecutor’s Office at the High Court of Cassation and Justice, Romania) to be constitutional.

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Romania, Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), C-817/21, R.I. v Inspecţia Judiciară and N.L., of 11 May 2023, ECLI:EU:C:2023:391

Deciding court:

Topic: rule of law, independence of the judiciary

National Follow Up Of (when relevant):

ECtHR jurisprudence: no explicit reference to ECtHR jurisprudence; implicit reliance on the ‘doctrine of appearances’ (e.g. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-105236)

TRIIAL CASE

Slovenia, Administrative Court, I U 1490/2019-92, ordinary, 22 June 2020, ECLI:SI:UPRS:2020:I.U.1490.2019.92

Deciding court: Administrative Court of Republic of Slovenia

Topic: Rule of law: Principle of legality (in particular, law making powers of the executive/law making procedures) Prevention of abuse of powers Prohibition of arbitrariness Fair Trial/Access to Justice Trust: Rule of law challenges affecting cooperation and mutual trust under the Return Directive

National Follow Up Of (when relevant):

ECtHR jurisprudence: M.S. S. v Belgium and Greece, app. no. 30696/09, 21 January 2011 Hirsi Jamaa v Italy, app. no. 27765/09, 23 February 2012 Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, app. no. 47287/15, 21 November 2019 Čonka v. Belgium, app. no. 51564/99, 5 February 2002 M. A. v. Cyprus, app. no. 41872/10, 23 July 2013 M. A. and Others v. Lithuania, app. no. 59793/17, 11 December 2018 N.D. and N. T., app. nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, 13 February 2020 Shioshvili and Others v. Russia, app. no. 19356/07, 20 December 2016 Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece, app. no. 16643/09, 21 October 2014 Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, app. no. 16483/12, 15 December 2016.

TRIIAL CASE

Slovenia, Administrative Court, Judgment I U 1351/2020, 21 October 2020, ECLI:SI:UPRS:2020:I.U.1351.2020.20

Deciding court: Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia

Topic: Mutual trust, rule of law

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A

ECtHR jurisprudence: Trabelsi v. Belgium, App. no. 140/10, 4. 9. 2014, odst. 118Aswat v. the United KingdomBabar Ahmad and Others v. the United Kingdom, App. nos. 24027/07, 11949/08, 36742/08, 66911/09 and 67354/09, 10. 4. 2012Calovskis v. Latvia, App. no. 22205/13. 24. 7. 2014Steven Willcox and Scott Hurford v the United Kingdom, App. Nos. 43759/10 and 43771/12, 8. 1. 2013Kafkaris v. Cyprus (12. 2. 2008)López Elorza v. Spain, App. no. 30614/1512. 12. 2017Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey, App. nos. 46827/99, 46951/99, 4. 2. 2005mutatis mutandis: Hirsi Jamma and Others v. Italy; mutatis mutandis: Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary App. no. 47287/15, 21. 11. 2019mutatis mutandis: J.K. and others v. Sweden, App. no. 59166/12, 23. 8. 2016

TRIIAL CASE

Slovenia, Constitutional Court, U-I-59/17-27, constitutional, 18 September 2019, ECLI:SI:USRS:2019:U.I.59.17

Deciding court: The Constitutional Court of Republic of Slovenia

Topic: Rule of law: Principle of legality (in particular, law making powers of the executive/law making procedures) Prevention of abuse of powers Prohibition of arbitrariness Fair Trial/Access to Justice Trust: - Mutual trust in Dublin Procedures (safe-third country concept)

National Follow Up Of (when relevant):

ECtHR jurisprudence: Vilvarajah and others v the United Kingdom of 30 October 1991 Chahal v the United Kingdom of of 15 November 1996 Soering v the United Kingdom of 7 July 1989, M.S. S. v Belgium and Greece of 21 January 2011, J.K. and others v Sweden of 23 August 2016 Ilias and Ahmed v Hungary of 14 March 2017 Jabari v Turkey Turčiji of 11 July 2000 Bahaddar v the Netherlands of 19 February 1998 Salah Sheekh v the Netherlands of 11 January 2007 Amuur v France of 25 June 1996 Selmouni v France of 28 July 1999 Gäfgen v Germany of 1 June 2010 Bouyid v Belgium of 28 September 2015 Khlaifia and Others v Italy of 15 December 2016

TRIIAL CASE

Slovenia, Constitutional Court, U-I-246/19-11, constitutional, 24 October 2019, ECLI:SI:USRS:2021:U.I.246.19; Constitutional Court, U-I-214/19-17, Up-1011/19-52, constitutional, 8 July 2021, ECLI:SI:USRS:2021:U.I.214.19

Deciding court: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia

Topic: Accountability Independence (interference by the legislative branch), Rule of law (prevention of abuse of powers)

National Follow Up Of (when relevant):

ECtHR jurisprudence: Venice Commission Study no. 759/2014 of 25 March 2014: Amicus Curiae Brief in the case of Rywin v. Poland, paras. 6, 17, 31. Kövesi v. Romania, 5 May 2020

TRIIAL CASE

Portugal, Judges’ strike in 2017

Deciding court: Not applicable.

Topic: Rule of law, freedom of association of judges and prosecutors

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): Not applicable.

ECtHR jurisprudence: Not applicable.