The Belgian Constitutional Court asked the Court of Justice whether privacy and procedural rights under Articles 47 and 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights are infringed if information must be shared further to the reporting obligations set out in Article 8ab(5) of DAC3 Directive (2011/16), inserted by Directive 2018/822), where the ‘tax intermediary’ in question is a lawyer, and the reporting requirement, particularly with respect to third party intermediaries, violates lawyer-client privilege.

Fundamental Rights - Administrative cooperation in the field of taxation - Mandatory automatic exchange of information in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements - Legal professional privilege of the lawyer

This case was joined with Case C‑615/20

Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Rule of law – Effective legal protection in the fields covered by Union law – Independence of judges – Primacy of EU law – Article 4(3) TEU – Duty of sincere cooperation – Lifting of a judge’s immunity from prosecution and his or her suspension from duties ordered by the Izba Dyscyplinarna (Disciplinary Chamber) of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Lack of independence and impartiality on the part of that chamber – Alteration of the composition of the court formation called on to adjudicate on a case which up to that time had been entrusted to that judge – Prohibitions on national courts calling into question the legitimacy of a court, on undermining its functioning or on assessing the legality or effectiveness of the …

European Arrest Warrant of the Local Court of Tiergarten (Germany) - interpretation of Art. 4(5) FD EAW - ne bis in idem - person finally judged in third country (here: Iran) - conditions for applying Art. 9 OLW implementing Art. 4(5) FD EAW - mutual trust in the legal order of the third country

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Article 8(1)(c) – European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State for the purposes of a criminal prosecution on the basis of a detention order issued by the same authority – No judicial review prior to surrender of the requested person – Consequences – Effective judicial protection – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

This case was joined with Case C‑671/20

Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Rule of law – Effective legal protection in the fields covered by Union law – Independence of judges – Primacy of EU law – Article 4(3) TEU – Duty of sincere cooperation – Lifting of a judge’s immunity from prosecution and his or her suspension from duties ordered by the Izba Dyscyplinarna (Disciplinary Chamber) of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Lack of independence and impartiality on the part of that chamber – Alteration of the composition of the court formation called on to adjudicate on a case which up to that time had been entrusted to that judge – Prohibitions on national courts calling into question the legitimacy of a court, on undermining its functioning or on assessing the legality or effectiveness of the …

Interpretation of Directive 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing - Limit of public access to information of beneficial owners of a company - Luxembourgish "Register for Beneficial Owners" (RBO) - infringements of the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of data and/or the right to an effective judicial remedy - Access without monitoring and justification and without any knowledge of beneficial owner - compatibility of access to beneficial owner information by the general public with the principles of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

Value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – Fraudulent concealment of tax due – Penalties – National legislation which provides for an administrative penalty and a criminal penalty for the same acts – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 49 – Article 50 – Principle ne bis in idem – Article 52(1) – Limitations to the principle ne bis in idem – Requirement to provide for clear and precise rules – Possibility of taking into account the interpretation of national legislation by national courts – Need to provide for rules ensuring the proportionality of all of the penalties imposed – Penalties of different kinds

Investigative measures carried out in absentia - interpretation and scope of Art. 8(2)(b) in conjunction with recitals 36 to 39 of Directive 2016/343 and Art. 4а(1)(b) in conjunction with recitals 7 to 10 of Framework Decision 2009/299 - sufficiency of legal protection under the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure

Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing - Directive (EU) 2015/849 - Article 18(1) and (3) - Point 3(b) of Annex III - Risk-based approach - Risk assessment carried out by obliged entities - Identification of risks by Member States and obliged entities - Customer due diligence measures - Enhanced due diligence measures - High-corruption-risk third countries - Article 13(1)(c) and (d) - Evidence and documentation requirements for obliged entities - Article 14(5) - Ongoing monitoring of customers by obliged entities - Publication of decisions imposing a sanction

Question referred: Must Article 39 of Council Decision 2007/533/JHA of 12 June 2007 on the establishment, operation and use of the second generation Schengen Information System (SIS II), and in particular Article 39(3) thereof, be interpreted as meaning that it allows national rules and administrative practices under which, if the competent executing authority has valid reason to conclude that the alert entered in the SIS is not covered by the objectives for which it has been registered, and in particular the objectives laid down in Article 38(1), that authority can and must refuse to execute it?

Interpretation of Directive 2014/42/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the freezing and confiscation of instrumentalities and proceeds of crime in the European Union - freezing of alleged instrumentalities and alleged proceeds of a criminal offence - rights of accused and third parties

Is point 8 of Annex I to Directive (EU) 2016/681 1 compatible with Articles 7 and 8 and the first paragraph of Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in view of the fact that it is not clear whether it includes only the information relating to the fact that the person concerned has frequent flier status, or also other information relating to flights and bookings covered by the frequent flyer programme, which might mean that the requirement relating to the clarity and precision of rules affecting the right to protection of private life and the right to protection of personal data is not met?

Is point 12 of Annex I to Directive (EU) 2016/681 compatible with Articles 7 and 8 and the first paragraph of Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of …

Principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties - National legislation that provides for both administrative and criminal liability for the same act (driving a motor vehicle that is not duly registered) - Proportionality of penalties within the meaning of Art. 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

Interpretation of Art. 8(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on the strengthening of certain aspects of the presumption of innocence and of the right to be present at the trial in criminal proceedings - Relationship between a ban under administrative law on entering and residing in the country in which the criminal proceedings are being conducted and the right to be present in person at the trial - Conversion of the "right to be present" into an obligation to be present under national implementation legislation - Waiver of the right to be present.

Refusal of a European Arrest Warrant for trials in absentia - non-compliance with Art. 8 and 9 of Directive 343/2016 in the issuing Member State - obligations to execute EAWs - flight of the requested person - examination of in absentia constellations - Art. 4a FD EAW as facultative refusal ground

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – European arrest warrant – Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA – Surrender procedures between Member States – Article 6(1) and Article 8(1)(c) – European arrest warrant issued on the basis of a national measure putting a person under investigation – Concept of an ‘arrest warrant or any other enforceable judicial decision having the same effect’ – No national arrest warrant – Consequences – Effective judicial protection – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union