Search results

On 8 April 2019, the Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, presented her first annual activity report before the Parliamentary Assembly.

On 1 April 2019, the Court elected Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos (Greece) as new President, Robert Spano (Iceland) as new Vice-President, and Ksenija Turković (Croatia) as new Section President. They took office on 5 May 2019.

If the national legislation of an EU Member State does not provide for legal remedies, by means of which the substantive reasons for an investigative measure requested by a European Investigation Order (EIO), cannot be challenged, this Member State is not entitled to use the EIO instrument. This far-reaching legal ramification was proposed by Advocate General Yves Bot in his opinion of 11 April 2019 in case C-324/17 (criminal proceedings against Ivan Gavanozov)

On 30 April 2019, AG Sánchez-Bordona presented his opinion in case C-128/18 (Dumitru-Tudor Dorobantur). The request for a preliminary ruling goes back to a demand by the Federal Constitutional Court that the referring court must ask the CJEU to further determine the factors relevant to the assessment of the detention conditions in the issuing State.

In its judgment of 12 February 2019, the CJEU dealt with the implication of non-compliance with the time limits for the decision to execute a European Arrest Warrant on maintaining the requested person’s extradition detention. The CJEU ultimately had to decide whether the Dutch law implementing Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European Arrest Warrant (FD EAW) and the case law of the Amsterdam courts could be upheld against Art. 6 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (CFR).

The European Investigation Order (EIO) is a major step forward in judicial cooperation in criminal matters within the EU. It has become the main legal tool to gather trans-border evidence, replacing the traditional MLA conventions mainly used for this purpose so far. It co-exists with …