- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Joined Cases C-647/21 and C-648/21, D. K. (Withdrawal of cases from a judge): Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 6 March 2025 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Słupsku – Poland) – Criminal proceedings against D. K. (C-647/21), M. C., M. F. (C-648/21) (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Rule of law – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Principle of the irremovability of judges and judicial independence – Resolution of the college of a court withdrawing all cases from a judge – Lack of objective criteria for taking a withdrawal decision – Lack of obligation to state reasons for such a decision – Primacy of EU law – Obligation to disapply such a decision to withdraw cases)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CA0647
62021CA0647
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2025/2334
28.4.2025
(Joined Cases C-647/21 and C-648/21,
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Rule of law - Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU - Principle of the irremovability of judges and judicial independence - Resolution of the college of a court withdrawing all cases from a judge - Lack of objective criteria for taking a withdrawal decision - Lack of obligation to state reasons for such a decision - Primacy of EU law - Obligation to disapply such a decision to withdraw cases)
(C/2025/2334)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties in the main proceedings
other parties: Prokuratura Rejonowa w Bytowie, Prokuratura Okręgowa w Łomży
Operative part of the judgment
The second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU
must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which a body of a national court, such as the college of that court, may withdraw from a judge of that court some or all of the cases assigned to him or her, where that legislation does not lay down criteria which must guide that body when it takes such a decision to withdraw cases or require that reasons for that decision be stated.
The second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU and the principle of the primacy of EU law
must be interpreted as requiring a national court to disapply a resolution of the college of that court withdrawing from a judge of that court cases previously assigned to him or her, and other subsequent acts, such as the decisions relating to the reassignment of those cases, where that resolution was adopted in breach of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU. The judicial bodies responsible for determining and modifying the composition of that formation must disapply such a resolution.
—
(1) OJ C 73, 14.2.2022.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2334/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—