Search results

On 19 January 2022, OLAF reported on the results of a joint investigation team (JIT) involving OLAF, the Romanian National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) and the Prosecution Office of the Italian commune of Enna. The investigations revealed practices of a criminal group that defrauded EU agricultural …

The CJEU delivered a judgment on the Romanian rules and practice to hinder ordinary courts to assess compatibility of national provisions with EU law. According to the judges in Luxembourg, EU law precludes a national rule under which national courts have no jurisdiction to examine the conformity with EU law of national legislation which has been held to be constitutional by a judgment of the constitutional court of the Member State.

In his opinion of 20 January 2022, AG Giovanni Pitruzzella concluded that the fourth anti-money laundering (AML) Directive as amended by the fifth AML Directive is partly invalid. In essence, the case addresses the question of balancing transparency requirements with respect for fundamental rights.

In his opinion replying to a reference for preliminary ruling by the Belgian Constitutional Court, AG Pitruzzella concluded that, in essence, the EU's PNR Directive is compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Only one point in the definition of PNR data in the Annex of the Directive is too broad and thus inapplicable. The duration of retention must however be limited to what is strictly necessary.

On 7 February 2022, the LIBE Committee discussed a study which analysed the EU’s possibilities to protect EU citizens from politically motivated Interpol Red Notices.

On 27 January 2022, the CJEU declared Spanish legislation, which allows the imposition of high fines if a Spanish tax resident failed to comply with mere obligations to declare or purely formal obligations regarding his/her overseas assets, not in line with the principle of free movement of capital.

On 16 February 2022, the CJEU dismissed the actions brought by Hungary and Poland that sought annulment of Regulation 2020/2092 “on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget”. The CJEU mainly rejected three pleas put forward by the applicants. The CJEU confirmed the legal basis, the non-circumvention of the "Article 7 procedure", and the compatibility with the principle of legal certainty.

According to the CJEU, the current situation in Bulgaria, which does not provide for legal remedies against investigative measures and the issuance of a European Investigation Order (EIO) infringes the fundamental rights of the Charter and means that Bulgaria cannot issue EIOs as long as this situation is not remedied.

According to an opinion by AG Rantos, national courts cannot refuse executing EAWs only because the appointment of Polish judges was unlawful. Courts must strictly follow the line established by the CJEU in LM. However, the recent judgment by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal that questioned the primacy of Union law may cast doubts on Poland's compatibility with essential fundamental rights and may justify refusals.

Civil society organisations published a compendium of scenarios that showcase situations in which the planned e-evidence Regulation would lead to serious fundamental rights harms.