Total Row: 79 / View:
Page:
TRIIAL CASE
Hungary, Nemzeti Adatvédelmi és Információszabadság Hatóság (National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information), NAIH-85-3/2022, 8 February 2022
Deciding court: National Authority for Data Protection and Freedom of Information
Topic: rule of law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
TRIIAL CASE
Hungary, Fővárosi Törvényszék (Metropolitan Court of Budapest), 105.K.701.218/2023/16 (Pegasus case), first instance, 8 February 2024
Deciding court: Metropolitan Court of Budapest
Topic: Rule of Law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
TRIIAL CASE
Romania, Curtea de Apel Cluj, Preliminary reference - Case C‑201/14, Bara and Others, ECLI:EU:C:2015:638
Deciding court: Cluj Court of Appeal - Court of Justice of the European Union
Topic: fundamental rights, rule of law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
TRIIAL CASE
Hungary, European Court of Human Rights, Hüttl v. Hungary no. 58032/16, 29 September 2022
Deciding court: European Court of Human Rights
Topic: rule of law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NO
ECtHR jurisprudence: Article 8 of the Europen Convention on Human RightsSzabó and Vissy v. Hungary, no. 37138/14, 12 January 2016; Leja v. Latvia, no. 71072/01, § 46, 14 June 2011
TRIIAL CASE
Slovenia, Information Commissioner, Opinion no. 07121-1/2021/2502, 21 December 2021
Deciding court: Information Commissioner of the Republic of Slovenia
Topic: Rule of law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
TRIIAL CASE
Romania – Court of Justice of the European Union (First Chamber) Case C-53/23 of 8 May 2024, ECLI:EU:C:2024:388 (request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Curtea de Apel Piteşti (Court of Appeal Piteşti, Romania), made by decision of 31 January 2023, in the proceedings Asociația ‘Forumul Judecătorilor din România’, Asociația ‘Mișcarea pentru Apărarea Statutului Procurorilor’ v Parchetul de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie – Procurorul General al României
Deciding court: Court of Justice of the European Union
Topic: Rule of law, independence of the judiciary, Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, Benchmarks subscribed to by Romania, Fight against corruption, Investigations of offences committed within the judicial system, Action challenging the nomination of prosecutors with competence to conduct those investigations, Standing of professional associations of judges to bring proceedings
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): The national case is not the direct follow -up of a CJEU or ECtHR decision.
ECtHR jurisprudence: The ECHR jurisprudence was not referred to in this case.
TRIIAL CASE
Slovenia, Constitutional Court of Slovenia, Decision U-I-152/17-13, constitutional, 4 July 2019, ECLI:SI:USRS:2019:U.I.152.17
Deciding court: Constitutional Court of Slovenia
Topic: Rule of law and predictive Justice
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: -    Article 8 of ECHR-    Article 2 of Protocol 4 to the ECHR-    Benedik v Slovenia, 24. 4. 2018.-    S. and Marper v the UK, 4. 12. 2008.-    Surikov v Ukraine, 26. 1. 2017.
TRIIAL CASE
Slovenia, Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Decision U-I-192/23-13, constitutional, 1 February 2024, ECLI:SI:USRS:2024:U.I.192.23
Deciding court: Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia
Topic: Rule of law
National Follow Up Of (when relevant): N/A
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
TRIIAL CASE
Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber), C-107/23 PPU (Effect of the decisions of a constitutional court), ECLI:EU:C:2023:606, in connection with Romanian Constitutional Court, Decision no. 297/26 April 2018, Decision no. 358/26 May 2022, Decision no. 67/2022 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice of Romania
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): The Judgment of the Court in the Case C-107/23 PPU represents the response to the request made by a national ordinary court, Curtea de Apel Brasov (Court of Appeal, Brasov, Romania) as follow-up of the Decision no. 297/26.04.2018 and Decision no. 358/26.05.2022 of the Romanian Constitutional Court and Decision no. 67/2022 of the High Court of Cassation and Justice of Romania, which clarify the way it should be judged a national case as regards the criminal limitation period for criminal liability especially in criminal cases of crimes against financial interest of European Union
ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A
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
Total Row: 79 / View:
Page:
 
Project implemented with financial support of the Fundamental Rights & Citizenship Programme of the European Union
© European University Institute 2019
Villa Schifanoia - Via Boccaccio 121, I-50133 Firenze - Italy