- 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
Case C-720/21: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Najwyższy (Poland) lodged on 26 November 2021 — Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021CN0720
62021CN0720
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
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 128/5
(Case C-720/21)
(2022/C 128/07)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant in the extraordinary appeal: Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich
Other parties to the proceedings: M.M., E.M., X Bank Spółka Akcyjna
Questions referred
1.Must the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union, and Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, be interpreted as making admissible a legal remedy, such as an extraordinary appeal, aimed at setting aside a final ruling of a court where there is a need to ‘ensure compliance with the principle of a democratic state ruled by law and implementing the principles of social justice’ if the use of that remedy is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of EU law?
2.Must the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union, and Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, be interpreted as meaning that, where provisions of national law make it possible for a final ruling of a court to be varied or set aside by means of a remedy such as an extraordinary appeal in the event of a breach of the principles enshrined in the Constitution of a Member State, those provisions may also be relied on as grounds for setting aside or varying a final ruling of a court in the event of a breach of EU law?
3.Must the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union, and Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, be interpreted as meaning that, where a national court has infringed EU law in a manner which has led to a case being decided in a way that is flawed from the point of view of that law, the final ruling of that court may be set aside or varied by means of a legal remedy, such as an extraordinary appeal, which makes such a decision conditional upon a ‘flagrant’ breach of the law?