Framework Decision 2002/584 on the European Arrest Warrant - Possibilities of executing authorities to refuse surrender on grounds of national law which are not provided as such in the FD - Lack of the issuing judicial authorities' jurisdiction as refusal ground - Rights of the executing authority to conduct a review of respect for the fundamental rights of the person sought in the issuing State - Scope of this right - Serious risk of infringement of fundamental rights - Remedies against fundamental rights violations in the issuing State -

Action for annulment brought by Poland against the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the European Union budget - Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 - questioning of legal basis - alleged circumvention of Article 7 TEU and Article 269 TFEU – Alleged infringements of Article 4(1), Article 5(2) and Article 13(2) TEU, of the second paragraph of Article 296 TFEU, of Protocol (No 2) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and of the principles of conferral, legal certainty, proportionality and equality of the Member States before the Treaties – Alleged misuse of powers.

Parallel case: C-156/21 (action for annulment of Regulation 2020/2092 by Hungary)

Action for annulment brought by Hungary against the general regime of conditionality for the protection of the European Union budget - Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 - questioning of legal basis - alleged circumvention of Article 7 TEU and Article 269 TFEU – alleged infringements of Article 4(1), Article 5(2) and Article 13(2) TEU and of the principles of legal certainty, proportionality and equality of Member States before the Treaties

Parallel case: C-157/21 (action for annulment of Regulation 2020/2092 by Poland)

Recognition of administrative financial penalties in accordance with Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties - Appeal to the Ministry of Justice and appeal to the district court at a later stage of the proceedings

Procedural rights in European Arrest Warrant Proceedings - Conformity of national legislation with Union law - No efforts by the issuing judicial authority to inform a requested person of the factual and legal bases for his/her arrest and of the right to challenge the arrest warrant - Assessment of the merits of objections against the national arrest warrant only after surrender?

Interpretation of Art. 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) - No longer relevant alerts - Failure of action to remove the alert by the Member States that entered the alert - obligations of Member States in view of the alerts (here: registration of vehicles).

Surrender Agreement between the EU and Iceland/Norway - Issuance of a new arrest warrant for the purposes of criminal prosecution in the same case against a person whose surrender has been refused by a Member State of the European Union - Possibility of a Member State, to which an arrest warrant is addressed, to rule again in the case in which another Member State refused to surrender the same person for the purposes of criminal prosecution in the same case, after the requested person has exercised his or her right of free movement and moved from the State in which surrender had been refused to the State to which the new arrest warrant is addressed.

Mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 15(1) – Article 47 – Article 49(3) – Elective public office – Conflict of interests – National legislation prohibiting the holding of elective public office for a predetermined period – Penalty additional to the termination of the term of office – Principle of proportionality

Compatibility of national legislation with the Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests (Art. 9) - Subjective and objective limits of liability for the effective payment of VAT which are permissible pursuant to the relevant provisions of EU law and the principle of proportionality in cases where the financial interests of the Union have been harmed - Joint and several liability for VAT post factum - Personal liability of the debt of a third party - Conduct of a non-taxable natural person in bad faith - payments of interests due on VAT.

Non-contractual liability - OLAF investigations - Leaks to the press - Material and non-material damage - Causal link - Imputability of the leaks - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals - Confidentiality of legal advice

Ne bis in idem - amnesty and individual pardon - compliance with guarantees in Art. 47 and 50 CFR, Art. 82 TFEU - limited review by Constitutional Court - parliamentary resolution that revoked amnesty merely based on assessment of compliance with Slovak Constitution

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 …