CJC Database

TRIIAL CASE

Romania, Decision nr. 9P/13.09.2023 of the Section for prosecutors in disciplinary matters in Case file nr. 9/P/2022, definitive by Court Decision nr. 54/ 18.03.2024 of ICCJ (Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice) in case file nr. 2748/1/2023

Deciding court: Romanian High Court of Casation and Justice

Topic: impartiality, freedom of expression

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NOT RELEVANT

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Romania, Decision nr. 10P/13.09.2023 of the Section for prosecutors in disciplinary matters in Case file nr. 6/P/2022, definitive by Court Decision nr. 74/ 18.03.2024 of ICCJ (Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice) in case file nr. 2817/1/2023

Deciding court: Romanian High Court of Casation and Justice

Topic: impartiality, freedom of expression

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NOT RELEVANT

ECtHR jurisprudence: The European Convention of Human RightsCase Eminagaoglu vs. Turkey, ECHR, Application no. 76521/12, Final decision of 05/07/2021.

TRIIAL CASE

Czech Republic, Ústavní soud (Constitutional Court), Pl. ÚS 39/08, constitutional, 6. 10. 2010

Deciding court: Constitutional Court

Topic: independence, impartiality

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

ECtHR jurisprudence:

TRIIAL CASE

Czech Republic, Krajský soud v Brně (Regional Court in Brno), 31 A 68/2018-177, ordinary, 7. 11. 2018

Deciding court: Regional Court in Brno

Topic: independence, accountability, impartiality

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): No

ECtHR jurisprudence: ECtHR, A.H. v the United Kingdom, app. no. 3868/68

TRIIAL CASE

Spain, Tribunal Constitucional (Spanish Constitutional Court), 15/2024, 30 of January 2024

Deciding court: Constitutional Court

Topic: Independence

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NO

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Spain, Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court), 1349/2023, 27 of October of 2023

Deciding court: Supreme Court

Topic: Independence

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NO

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Spain, Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court), 420/2017, 10 of march of 2017

Deciding court: Supreme Court

Topic: Independence

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): NO

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Romania, The High Court of Cassation and Justice, case no. 2833/1/2023, supreme instance, Civil decision no. 52 of 11 March 2024

Deciding court: The High Court of Cassation and Justice

Topic: impartiality, freedom of expression

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

ECtHR jurisprudence: Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights; Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights

TRIIAL CASE

Portugal, Supreme Court of Justice, Registration No. 22/21.8YFLSB, supreme, 4th July 2023.

Deciding court: Supreme Court of Justice

Topic: Independence, accountability.

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

ECtHR jurisprudence: N/A

TRIIAL CASE

Poland, Naczelny Sąd Administracyjny (Supreme Administrative Court), case number II OSK 382/20, appellate instance, 11 January 2022

Deciding court: Supreme Administrative Court in Poland

Topic: mutual trust and impartiality

National Follow Up Of (when relevant): This national case is not a direct follow-up of a CJEU or ECtHR decision.

ECtHR jurisprudence: In the case under consideration, ECtHR jurisprudence was referred to indirectly by invoking the protection of fundamental rights, particularly through:Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which prohibits inhuman or degrading treatment. This was referenced in relation to the risk of mistreatment upon the transfer of the applicant under the Dublin III Regulation.Article 8 of the ECHR was indirectly invoked concerning the right to respect for family life, which is relevant in assessing whether the transfer under the Dublin III Regulation could lead to a violation of family unity, given the applicant's marriage to a Polish national.In particular, the B.S. v. Spain and Tarakhel v. Switzerland cases are often cited in similar situations concerning the risk of human rights violations in the context of the Dublin transfers. However, the decision did not explicitly mention these cases, focusing more on the CJEU case law.