CJEU cases
This CJEU case law documentation of eucrim monitors, collects, and summarises legal proceedings brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union in the field of European Union “criminastrive” law, with a focus on the protection of the Union’s financial interests. This database intends to give an overview of the various legal actions brought before the General Court and the Court of Justice, with a view to fostering a pan-European understanding and debate on the interpretation of the relevant EU law provisions, their incorporation into national legislation, and cooperation between judicial authorities. Users find (1) basic information on the case in the left column, such as the reference number, case name (“parties”), and referring court (if applicable), (2) a description of the subject matter in the central column, including related links to other eucrim content (e.g., summary of a CJEU decision in eucrim news), and (3) the state of play of the case in the right column. The database is regularly updated. Searches by keywords or the year of the case are also possible.
Case Information | Subject Matter | Stage of Proceedings |
---|---|---|
C-352/22
|
Interpretation of Directive 2013/32/EU (Asylum Procedures Directive) and Directive 2011/95 (Qualification Directive) - Binding effect of recognition of persons as a refugee within the meaning of the Geneva Convention on Refugees in another EU Member State for the extradition procedure in the Member States requested to extradite such person to a third country/his country of origin - Preclusion of extradition until the revocation or expiry of recognition as refugee by the other EU Member State CategoriesFundamental Rights Judicial CooperationRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
C-351/22
|
principles of legal certainty and nulla poena sine lege - confiscation of the entire proceeds of a transaction - Decision 2014/512/CFSP, (1) in particular Articles 5 and 7 thereof - automatic confiscation of any proceeds resulting from a breach of the obligation to notify a transaction falling within the scope of Article 2(2)(a) of Decision 2014/512/CFSP MoreCategoriesUkraine conflict European Court of Justice (ECJ) Freezing of Assets / ConfiscationRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
C-333/22
|
Questions referred: Do Articles 47 and 8(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union require provision to be made for a judicial remedy against an independent supervisory authority such as the Supervisory Body for Police Information where it exercises the rights of the data subject vis-à-vis the controller? Does Article 17 of Directive 2016/680 (1) comply with Articles 47 and 8(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, in that it obliges the supervisory authority — which exercises the rights of the data subject vis-à-vis the controller — only to inform the data subject ‘that all necessary verifications or a review by the supervisory authority have taken place’ and ‘of his or her right to seek a judicial remedy’, when such information does not enable any a … MoreCategoriesData ProtectionRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
T-313/22
|
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures 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 – Restriction on entry into the territory of the Member States – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to restrictions on entry into the territories of the Member States – Inclusion and maintenance of the applicant’s name on the lists – Definition of ‘leading businesspersons’ – Article 2(1)(g) of Decision 2014/145/CFSP – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Error of assessment – Proportionality – Equal treatment – Right to property – Freedom to conduct a business – Right to private life – Application of restriction on entry to a national of a … MoreCategoriesFundamental Rights Ukraine conflictRelated links |
Application compensation Judgement |
C-305/22
|
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal Bucharest lodged on 6 May 2022. The questions referred relate to the interpretation of Article 4(6) EAW FD in conjunction with Articles 25 and 4(2) of Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA, and the interpretation of Articles 4(5) and 8(1)(c) EAW FD. A European arrest warrant is issued for the enforcement of final criminal decision. The executing authorities refuse to transfer the requested person and deliver their own decision recognizing the issuing authority’s final decision and enforce this decision on their own territory. The issuing authority of the final decision makes opposition to the enforcement of their final criminal decision by an executing authority. European Arrest Warrant (EAW) - Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - principle of mutual recognition to decisions in criminal matters - principle ne bis in idem … MoreCategoriesArea of Freedom, Security and Justice Eurojust European Judicial Network (EJN) European Arrest Warrant Judicial Cooperation Law Enforcement Cooperation Transfer of Sentenced Persons Ne bis in idemRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Order |
T-282/22
|
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Inclusion of the applicant’s name on the lists of persons, entities and bodies concerned – Concept of ‘leading businessperson’ – Obligation to state reasons – Error of assessment – Proportionality MoreCategoriesUkraine conflict Freezing of Assets / ConfiscationRelated links |
Application Judgement |
C-281/22
|
Interpretation of Art. 31(3) and Art. 32 of Regulation 2017/1939 on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) - Scope/extent of judicial review in the supporting Member State in the event of cross-border investigations within the EPPO regime - Taking into account the examination of the admissibility of the measure by a court in the Member State of the European Delegated Prosecutor handling the case on the basis of the law of that Member State. MoreCategoriesEuropean Public Prosectutor's Office (EPPO) European Investigation Order Judicial CooperationRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
T-271/22
|
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’ CategoriesUkraine conflict Council Commission Freezing of Assets / Confiscation |
Application Judgement |
C-261/22
|
Fundamental rights protection under the Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant - (Non-)surrender of a mother who has minor children living with her? - Compatibility of Arts. 1(2) and (3), 3 and 4 of the FD EAW with Arts. 7 and 24(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, also considering ECtHR case-law in relation to Art. 8 ECHR and the constitutional traditions common to the Member States, in so far as they require the surrender of the mother, thus severing ties with minor children living with her without considering the best interest of the child MoreCategoriesEuropean Arrest Warrant Judicial CooperationRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
C-242/22 PPU
|
Interpretation of Art. 1 to 3 of Directive 2010/64 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings - "essential document" - information on the right to interpretation and translation according to Art. 3(1)(d) of Directive 2012/13 - non-transposition into national law - direct effect - revocation of a probation sentence - relative nullity and compatibility with Union law CategoriesProcedural SafeguardsRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
T-233/22
|
Action for annulment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine – Prohibition on any non-Russian-registered aircraft owned, chartered or otherwise controlled by any Russian natural or legal person, entity or body, from landing in, taking off from, or overflying the territory of the European Union – Article 4e of Decision 2014/512/CFSP – Lack of jurisdiction of the General Court – Article 3d of Regulation (EU) No 833/2014 – Lack of locus standi – Inadmissibility MoreCategoriesFundamental Rights Ukraine conflictRelated links |
Application Judgement |
C-225/22
|
Interpretation of Art. 19(1) TEU and Art. 47 Charter – judicial independence – primacy of EU law – power of national courts to disregard binding decisions of constitutional courts – disciplinary liability for judicial review of judicial appointments – extraordinary appeal procedure in Poland CategoriesRule of Law |
Request Opinion (AG) |
C-219/22
|
Conformity of provisions of the Bulgarian Code of Criminal Procedure with Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings - taking into account of a conviction handed down in another Member State for the revocation of probation - interpretation of the notion "altering the arrangements for executing that sentence" CategoriesTaking Account of Convictions |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
C-209/22
|
Application of Directives 2013/48 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and Directive 2012/13 on the right to information in criminal proceedings factual situations in which coercive measures in the form of personal search and seizure were carried out against a natural person believed by the police to be in possession of narcotics during the investigation of an offence relating to the possession of narcotics - legal concept of "suspect" not recognised in the national law of the Member State in question - judicial review of coercive measures in cases of serious breach of fundamental rights - limitation of review by national courts in this sense CategoriesProcedural SafeguardsRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |
C-179/22
|
Relationship between Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union and Framework Decision 2002/584 on the European arrest warrant - no effective execution by imprisonment of the sentenced person following a pardon and suspension of the sentence, in accordance with the law of the executing State, and without obtaining the consent of the sentencing State in the context of the recognition procedure. MoreCategoriesEuropean Arrest Warrant Transfer of Sentenced Persons |
Request |
C-178/22
|
Processing of personal data in the electronic communications sector – Confidentiality of communications – Providers of electronic communications services – Directive 2002/58/EC – Article 1(3) and Article 15(1) – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7, 8 and 11 and Article 52(1) – Request by a public prosecutor for access to data for the investigation and prosecution of aggravated theft of a mobile telephone – Definition of ‘serious crime’ capable of justifying serious interference with fundamental rights – Scope of prior review to ensure compliance with the requirement of the commission of a serious crime – Principle of proportionality MoreRelated links |
Request Opinion (AG) Judgment |