Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – immediate family member criterion

Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on the list – Concept of ‘leading businessperson involved in economic sectors providing a substantial source of revenue to the Government of the Russian Federation’

Amnesty for offences of misappropriation of national public funds - budget of a Member State's region and effects on the protection of the EU's financial interests - Art. 325 TFEU - territorial integrity of the European Union - systemic risk of impunity and compliance with Art. 325 TFEU

Pursuant to the successful challenge brought by Pumpyanskiy in T-740/22 - regarding Council's restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine - the Council of the EU brought an appeal 5 September 2024.

The central issue revolves around the criterion of ‘leading businesspersons operating in Russia’, criterion (g), as prescribed by Article 2(1) of Council Decision 2014/145/CFSP as amended by Council Decision (CFSP) 2023/1094.

Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) - Freezing of funds - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources - Concept of ‘leading businessperson’

Interpretation of Art. 1(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant, read in conjunction with Art. 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - real risk of serving a sentence that is disproportionate to the offence on which the European arrest warrant is based (here: drugs offences) - competence of examination by the executing authority - test that applies in assessing whether there is a real risk of the execution of a final disproportionate sentence - role of the law of the issuing state implementing Art. 4(2)(b) of Framework Decision 2004/757/JHA laying down minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking - conditions for reducing mandatory minimum sentence - preclusion of suspension of enforcement.

The referring Court asks whether or not the executing judicial authority adopting a decision to recognise a European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of criminal proceedings, must also issue a decision ordering the arrest of that person, following which the person sought will remain detained in prison until such time as he or she is surrendered, consistent with Article 12 and Article 23(5) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA.

Protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law - Invalidity of Article 2(2) of Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 - Application of the Conditionality Regulation - legal term "government authorities" - Lack of procedural safeguards - lack of proportionality of the measure - Breach of the principle of presumption of innocence, the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination - Infringement of the principles of legal certainty and legitimate expectations - Lack of competence

First action to have been brought under Protocol (N°2) of the TEU by the National Assembly of the French Republic (Assemblée nationale de la République française) against the European Parliament and the Council of the EU. The French National Assembly seeks the annulment of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 whose objective is "the establishment of criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection registered in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, and the establishment of a solidarity mechanism to support Member States in addressing situations of migratory pressure." The applicant contends that the contested act exceeds the competences of the institutions of the EU and is as such in breach of the principle of subsidiarity (Articles 4 and 5 TEU).

Protocol (N°2) of the TEU - Principles …

Applicants seek annulment of specific provisions of EU legal instruments concerning restrictive measures implemented in response to Russia’s actions destabilizing Ukraine - Council Decision (CFSP) 2024/2026 - Violation of various legal principles, including lack of sufficient legal reasoning, violation of the principle of proportionality, and impediment of the right to effective judicial review

Interpretation of Art. 7 of Directive 2008/118/EC (Excise Duty Directive) concerning the conditions under which excise duty becomes chargeable.

The case addresses whether national legislation that allows excise duty to be charged based on fictitious supplies listed in falsified invoices, even where no actual movement or supply of goods occurred, is compatible with EU law.

The General Court ruled that such legislation violates EU law, as excise duty may only arise under the exhaustively listed situations of “release for consumption” defined in Art. 7(2) of the Directive. Fictitious transactions do not meet this criterion.

The case concerns a request for the surrender of the three appellants, sought by the UK, in accordance with the provisions of Title VII of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (“TCA”). All three warrants were endorsed for execution by the High Court of Ireland. As set out in the warrants, the issuing judicial authority intends to prosecute each of the appellants for 39 fraud-type offences, alleged to have been committed by them in their capacity as joint owners and directors of a company. The central issue that arises in the case at hand is whether Article 625(2) of the TCA prohibits the surrender of the appellants in the main proceedings because a person who is surrendered "may not be prosecuted, sentenced or otherwise deprived of liberty for an offence committed prior to that person’s surrender, other than that for which …

Compatibility of various provisions of Ley Orgánica 1/2024, de 10 de junio, de amnistía para la normalización institucional, política y social en Cataluña (Organic Law No 1/2024 of 10 June 2024 on amnesty for institutional, political and social normalisation in Catalonia) (the LOA) with EU law - allegations of mismanagement of public funds in Catalonia, potentially impacting the financial interests of the EU - Lack of accountability mechanisms under the LOA for recovering funds linked to activities during 2011–2017 that supported Catalan independence - interpretation of EU principles, including the protection of financial interests (Art. 325 TFEU) and the right to a fair trial (Art. 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights).

One question asks whether the extinguishing of accounting liability under the LOA conflicts with EU law, particularly regarding whether the funds involved were derived from EU or national …

Lawsuit against investigations and prosecutions by the EPPO - Transgression of competence - Art. 25(3) lit. a) of Regulation 2017/1939 - EPPO's violation of EU law by not dismissing or discontinuing the proceedings during the prosecution phase, as required by Art. 39 of Regulation 2017/1939 - Violation of temporal competence (Art. 22(1) EPPO Regulation) because EPPO has no competence to prosecute conduct affecting the financial interests of the European Union which arose before 1 December 2019 and alleged criminal conduct has occurred between 2011 and 2021 - EPPO’s decision to pursue the prosecution before the national court is invalid.

The case involves RT (fictitious name), who was convicted in another EU country without their chosen lawyer present. The Italian court seeks clarification on whether EU laws, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, European Convention on Human Rights, and several EU directives, permit Italy to refuse extradition under such circumstances.

European Arrest Warrant (EAW) - Right to information in criminal proceedings - Charter of Fundamental Rights - European Convention on Human Rights.

The case concerns the criteria for classifying online platforms as very large online platforms (VLOPs) under Art. 33(4) of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the ensuing obligations under Art. 39(1) and Art. 39(2) DSA regarding the obligation to make publicly available a repository containing the information referred to in Article 39(2) DSA.

The case concerns the independence of lawyers and the confidentiality obligations that are fundamental to the exercise of their profession. The applicants seek the annulment of several provisions in Regulation (EU) 2024/1624, which introduces anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing measures.

Anti-money laundering (AML) - Fundamental Rights - Lawyer-client privilege - Independence and confidentiality obligations