{"id":1007,"date":"2019-04-19T19:34:37","date_gmt":"2019-04-19T17:34:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/?page_id=1007"},"modified":"2023-12-02T22:34:49","modified_gmt":"2023-12-02T21:34:49","slug":"recent-relevant-case-law","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/recent-relevant-case-law\/","title":{"rendered":"Recent Case Law"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

In the table below you will find the full list of all posts relating to recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union \u2013 next to some other Courts \u2013 which have been commented upon in the \u201cNews\u201d section because they illustrate the ongoing interaction between the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t
Court<\/th>Name<\/th>Date<\/th>Case-Number<\/th>Keywords<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
ECtHR, CJEU<\/td>Trends 2021-26: An updated and enriched version of the paper taking stock of the interplay between the European Convention on Human Rights and EU Law<\/a><\/td><\/td><\/td>overview<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>From Full Coverage to Patchwork Coverage: The Convention in the Age of Hybrid EU Actors \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in WS and Others v. Frontex<\/a><\/td>18.12.2025<\/td>C-679\/23 P<\/td>Frontex<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>A judicial, comprehensive and flexible Strasbourg response to climate change: judgment of the ECtHR in Greenpeace Nordic and Others v. Norway<\/a><\/td>28.10.2025<\/td>34068\/21<\/td>climate change<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Bologna Tribunal<\/td>Conventional limits to EU law restrictions: when mutual trust meets human rights<\/a><\/td>10.10.2025<\/td>Decree 8445\/2023<\/td>asylum, EU citizens<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU, ECtHR<\/td>What a difference a composition makes\u2026 Comparing AW \u2018T\u2019 with Walesa v. Poland on the lack of judicial independence and the use of extraordinary appeals in Poland<\/a><\/td>4.9.2025, 23.11.2023<\/td>C-225\/22, 50849\/21<\/td>judicial independence, extraordinary appeals<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>How safe is the \u201csafe country of origin\u201d concept? Judgment of the CJEU in Alace and Canpelli<\/a><\/td>1.8.2025<\/td>C-758\/24 and C-759\/24<\/td>concept of \"safe country of origin\"<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU, ECtHR<\/td>Different but compatible approaches to international sports arbitration: comparing Semenya (ECtHR) with Royal Football Club Seraing (CJEU)<\/a><\/td>1.8.2025, 10.7.2025<\/td>C-600\/23, 10934\/21<\/td>sports arbitration<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU, ECtHR<\/td>What is the price of human dignity? Luxembourg (Minister for Children) and Strasbourg (Camara) interacting on extreme poverty of asylum seekers<\/a><\/td>1.8.2025, 8.7.2023<\/td>C-97\/24, 49255\/22<\/td>migration, extreme poverty<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>European Courts united in ensuring an effective access to procedures of international protection: judgment of the ECtHR in H.Q. and Others v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>24.6.2025<\/td>46084\/21, 40185\/22 and 53952\/22<\/td>collective expulsion, non-refoulement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>In search of a missing holistic approach: judgment of the CJEU in Nuratau<\/a><\/td>5.6.2025<\/td>C-349\/24<\/td>Subsidiary protection; right to private life<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Personal data better protected under the Convention than under the GDPR: judgment of the CJEU in Inspektorat kam Visshia sadeben savet<\/a><\/td>30.4.2025<\/td>C\u2011313\/23, C\u2011316\/23 and C\u2011332\/23<\/td>GDPR<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Domestic courts to verify Schengen Borders Code compliance: ECtHR ruling in Mansouri v. Italy<\/a><\/td>29.4.2025<\/td>63386\/16<\/td>refusal of entry; Schengen Borders Code<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>An elephant in the room: the European Convention on Human Rights and the EPPO \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in the EPPO case<\/a><\/td>8.4.2025<\/td>C-292\/23<\/td>EPPO<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The GDPR and the Convention, no strangers to each other \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Deldits<\/a><\/td>13.3.2025<\/td>C-247\/23<\/td>GDPR<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Case-law consistency on ne bis in idem: judgment of the CJEU in Engie Rom\u00e2nia SA<\/a><\/td>30.1.2025<\/td>C-205\/23<\/td>ne bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Convention protection of the absent accused lowered under EU law: judgment of the CJEU in the case of VB II<\/a><\/td>16.1.2025<\/td>C-400\/23<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings; conviction in absentia; waiver<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Breakdown of reception conditions for asylum seekers: Dublin not the whole story \u2013 judgment of the CJEU in Tudmur<\/a><\/td>19.12.2024<\/td>C\u2011185\/24 and C\u2011189\/24<\/td>Dublin Regulation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Non-formalistic Convention control over the application of the Brussels II bis Regulation: judgment of the ECtHR in Giannakopoulos v. Greece<\/a><\/td>3.12.2024<\/td>20503\/20<\/td>Brussels II bis Regulation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>\u201cThe fields covered by Union law\u201d: not outside the fields covered by the Convention \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in the case of PT<\/a><\/td>28.11.2024<\/td>C-432\/22<\/td>criminal procedure; plea-bargaining<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>European harmony on age discrimination: judgment of the ECtHR in Ferrero Quintana<\/a><\/td>26.11.2024<\/td>2669\/19<\/td>age discrimination<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>General presumption of compliance vs. systemic flaws \u2013 Judgment of the ECtHR in the case of H.T. v. Germany and Greece<\/a><\/td>15.10.2024<\/td>13337\/19<\/td>Dublin Regulation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>An upgrading of the parties to the proceedings in the system of preliminary rulings: judgment of the CJEU in KUBERA<\/a><\/td>15.10.2024<\/td>C-144\/23<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Benchmark function of the Convention stressed by the CJEU in Mirin and Real Madrid Club de F\u00fatbol<\/a><\/td>4.10.2024<\/td>C-633\/22 and C-4\/23<\/td>gender identity; freedom of the press<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU, ECtHR<\/td>Environmental pollution caused by the Ilva steelworks \u2013 judgment of the CJEU in Ilva and Others, compared with Cordella and Others v. Italy<\/a><\/td>25.06.2024<\/td>C-626\/22 and 54414\/13 & 54264\/15<\/td>pollution<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Raising and lowering of the Strasbourg standards regarding judicial review of detention \u2013 judgment of the CJEU in Stachev \u00a0<\/a><\/td>14.05.2024<\/td>C-15\/24 PPU<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings; access to a lawyer; waiver<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU, ECtHR<\/td>Similarities and differences between Strasbourg and Luxembourg on classified documents used in expulsion cases \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in the cases of NW and PQ, compared with Muhammad and Muhammad v. Romania<\/a><\/td>25.04.2024<\/td>C-420\/22 and C-528\/22; 80982\/12<\/td>classified documents; State security<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>The Convention and the Reception Conditions Directive: judgment of the ECtHR in the case of M.B. v. the Netherlands<\/a><\/td>23.04.2024<\/td>71008\/16<\/td>immigration detention<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Two different categories of fundamental rights under the Dublin III Regulation? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid<\/a><\/td>29.02.2024<\/td>C-392\/22<\/td>Dublin Regulation; pushbacks<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Successive scrutiny of the same legislation in Luxembourg and Strasbourg: judgment of the ECtHR in the case of Executief van de Moslims van Belgi\u00eb and Others v. Belgium<\/a><\/td>13.02.2024<\/td>16760\/22<\/td>freedom of religion; ritual slaughter<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The very essence or mere appearances? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Krajowa Rada S\u0105downictwa<\/a><\/td>21.12.2023<\/td>C-718\/21<\/td>judicial independence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Which fundamental rights exactly apply to proceedings of the EPPO? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of G.K. and Others<\/a><\/td>21.12.2023<\/td>C-281\/22<\/td>European Public Prosecutor<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Is the CJEU creating two different categories of fundamental rights? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of GN<\/a><\/td>21.12.2023<\/td>C-261\/22<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Luxembourg not the end of the story on freedom of religion in the workplace? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Commune d\u2019Ans<\/a><\/td>28.11.2023<\/td>C-148\/22<\/td>freedom of religion; discrimination in the workplace<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Preventive Convention control by the ECtHR over the execution of European arrest warrants<\/a><\/td>10.11.2023<\/td>39817\/23<\/td>Rule 39; European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Conditions for granting subsidiary protection \u201cfully compatible\u201d with \u2013 but not \u201cmore extensive\u201d than \u2013 Strasbourg : judgment of the CJEU in the case of Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid<\/a><\/td>09.11.2023<\/td>C-125\/22<\/td>subsidiary protection<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Two steps of unequal weight? Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Staatsanwaltschaft Aachen<\/a><\/td>09.11.2023<\/td>C-819\/21<\/td>mutual recognition; judgments imposing custodial sentences<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Different ways to the same goal: Strasbourg and Luxembourg on same-sex couples<\/a><\/td>05.09.2023<\/td>40209\/20<\/td>same-sex couples<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Which judge should assess the best interests of a wrongfully removed child? Judgment of the CJEU in TT<\/a><\/td>13.07.2023<\/td>87\/22<\/td>international child abduction<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The CJEU goes for the Strasbourg test of the \u201cproceedings as a whole\u201d: Judgment of the CJEU in K.B. and F.S.<\/a><\/td>22.06.2023<\/td>C-660\/21<\/td>procedural rights<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Migrants at the border: fundamental rights at stake or just another breach of secondary law? Comparing \u201cEuropean Commission v. Hungary\u201d with \u201cN.D. and N.T. v. Spain\u201d<\/a><\/td>22.06.2023<\/td>C-823\/21<\/td>Procedures Directive<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Two more Convention-compliant applications by the CJEU of Directive 2012\/13 on the right to information in criminal proceedings<\/a><\/td>25.05.2023 and 22.06.2023<\/td>C-608\/21 and C-660\/21<\/td>procedural rights; right to information<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>The requirement of consent by the data subject declared compatible with the Convention: Judgment of the ECtHR in Jehovah\u2019s Witnesses v. Finland<\/a><\/td>09.05.2023<\/td>31172\/19<\/td>data protection<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>More confusion about \u00ab\u00a0ne bis in idem\u00a0\u00bb: judgment of the CJEU in the case of MV \u2013 98<\/a><\/td>04.05.2023<\/td>C-97\/21<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>One step is enough? Judgment of the CJEU in E.D.L.<\/a><\/td>18.04.2023<\/td>C-699\/21<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>A different \u201cne bis in idem\u201d in Luxembourg? Judgment of the CJEU in Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg<\/a><\/td>23.03.2023<\/td>C-365\/21<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Reopening of domestic proceedings suggested following a failure to act upon a request for a preliminary ruling by the CJEU: judgment of the ECtHR in Georgiou v. Greece<\/a><\/td>14.03.2023<\/td>57378\/18<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>General test made autonomous for the assessment of risks involved in the execution of a EAW: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Puig Gordi and Others<\/a><\/td>31.01.2023<\/td>C-158\/21<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Same national legislation examined in Luxembourg and Strasbourg: decision by the ECtHR in the case of Freire Lopes<\/a><\/td>31.01.2023<\/td>58598\/21<\/td>right to property<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Imposed changes to the name of a person: judgment of the ECtHR in the case of K\u00fcnsberg Sarre v. Austria<\/a><\/td>17.01.2023<\/td>19475\/20<\/td>name of a person; private and family life<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>The right to an effective remedy in the context of asylum proceedings: judgment of the ECtHR in the case of S.H. v. Malta<\/a><\/td>20.12.2022<\/td>37241\/21<\/td>expulsion; right to an effective remedy<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>No reasons given by a first-instance court for its refusal to seek a preliminary ruling: judgment of the ECHR in the case of Rutar and Rutar Marketing D.O.O. v. Slovenia<\/a><\/td>15.12.2022<\/td>21164\/20<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The right to cross-examine witnesses, a tale of two methodologies: judgment of the CJEU in the case of HYA and Others<\/a><\/td>08.12.2022<\/td>C-348\/21<\/td>procedural rights; cross-examination of witnesses<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Denial of justice by not applying EU law: judgment of the ECHR in the case of Spasov v. Romania<\/a><\/td>06.12.2022<\/td>27122\/14<\/td>fair trial; denial of justice<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Return of a seriously ill person: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (\u00c9loignement \u2013 Cannabis th\u00e9rapeutique)<\/a><\/td>22.11.2022<\/td>C-69\/21<\/td>return directive; seriously ill person<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Enjoyment by private companies of the presumption of innocence and the rights of the defence: judgment by the CJEU in the case of Delta Stroy 2003<\/a><\/td>10.11.2022<\/td>C-203\/21<\/td>presumption of innocence; private companies<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Breach of the right to family life following delayed return of a child ordered under the Brussels IIa Regulation: judgment of the ECHR in the case of Veres v. Spain<\/a><\/td>08.11.2022<\/td>57906\/18<\/td>family life; international child abduction<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Failure to \u201cengage meaningfully\u201d with CJEU case-law: judgment of the ECHR in the case of Moraru v. Romania<\/a><\/td>08.11.2022<\/td>64480\/19<\/td>discrimination<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Procedural rights in criminal proceedings and the European Convention on Human Rights: judgments by the CJEU in the cases of HN and DD<\/a><\/td>15.09.2022<\/td>C-420\/20 and C-347\/21<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Push-back and detention of migrants at the border: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Valstyb\u0117s sienos apsaugos tarnyba<\/a><\/td>30.06.2022<\/td>C-72\/22 PPU<\/td>migration, push-back, detention<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The right to a new trial following a conviction in absentia: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Spetsializirana prokuratura<\/a><\/td>19.05.2022<\/td>C-569\/20<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>National legislation on the resolution of credit institutions compatible with the right to property: judgment of the CJEU in the case of BPC Lux 2 and Others<\/a><\/td>05.05.2022<\/td>C-83\/20<\/td>right to property<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Non bis in idem: between Menci and bpost \u2013 Judgment of the CJEU in the BV case<\/a><\/td>05.05.2022<\/td>C-570\/20<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>\u201cNon bis in idem\u201d in dual proceedings: CJEU judgment in the bpost case<\/a><\/td>22.03.2022<\/td>C-117\/20<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Risk of breach of the right to a tribunal established by law following the execution of a European arrest warrant: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Openbaar Ministerie (Tribunal established by law)<\/a><\/td>22.02.2022<\/td>joined cases C-562\/21 PPU and C-563\/21 PPU<\/td>European arrest warrant, judicial independence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>The right to information and interpretation in criminal proceedings: judgment of the CJEU in the case of IS<\/a><\/td>23.11.2021<\/td>C-564\/19<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Bosphorus presumption applicable to the storing of biometric data on a passport: decision of the ECHR in the case of Willems v. the Netherlands<\/a><\/td>09.11.2021<\/td>57294\/16<\/td>Bosphorus presumption<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>The Polish Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs not an \u201cindependent and impartial tribunal established by law\u201d: judgment by the ECHR in the case of Doli\u0144ska-Ficek and Ozimek v. Poland<\/a><\/td>08.11.2021<\/td>49868\/19 and 57511\/19<\/td>judicial independence, tribunal established by law<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Rights of the defence and mutual recognition of financial penalties: judgment by the CJEU in the case of Prokuratura Rejonowa \u0141\u00f3d\u017a-Ba\u0142uty<\/a><\/td>06.10.2021<\/td>C-338\/20<\/td>mutual recognition, financial penalties<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>EU law requirements of an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law: judgment of the CJEU in the case of W.\u017b.<\/a><\/td>06.10.2021<\/td>C-487\/19<\/td>judicial independence, tribunal established by law<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Disciplinary Chamber of the Polish Supreme Court: judgment of the ECHR in Reczkowicz v. Poland<\/a><\/td>22.07.2021<\/td>43447\/19<\/td>judicial independence, tribunal established by law<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Disciplinary regime applicable to Polish judges: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Commission v. Poland<\/a><\/td>15.07.2021<\/td>C-791\/19<\/td>judicial independence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Freedom to wear visible political, philosophical or religious signs in the workplace: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Wabe and MH M\u00fcller Handel<\/a><\/td>15.07.2021<\/td>C-804\/18 and C-341\/19<\/td>freedom to wear religious signs<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>The ECHR recalls its case-law on the obligation for courts to give reasons when dismissing a request for a preliminary ruling by the CJEU: decision in the case of Quintanel v. France<\/a><\/td>17.06.2021<\/td>12528\/17 et seq.<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Manifest deficiency in the execution of a European arrest warrant \u2013 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Bivolaru and Moldovan v. France<\/a><\/td>25.03.2021<\/td>40324\/16 and 12623\/17<\/td>European arrest warrant, manifest deficiency<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Degrading treatment and deprivation of liberty in the R\u00f6szke transit zone \u2013 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of R.R. and Others v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>02.03.2021<\/td>36037\/17<\/td>migration, detention, ill-treatment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Right to silence under the EU-Charter \u2013 judgment of the CJEU in the Consob case<\/a><\/td>02.02.2021<\/td>C-481\/19<\/td>right to silence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Effective access to international protection \u2013 detention of asylum seekers: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Commission v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>17.12.2020<\/td>C-808\/18<\/td>migration, detention<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Applying the right to freedom of religion under the Charter, having regard to the Convention \u2013 judgment of the CJEU in the case of Centraal Isra\u00eblitisch Consistorie van Belgi\u00eb and Others<\/a><\/td>17.12.2020<\/td>C-336\/19<\/td>freedom of religion, animal welfare<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>European arrest warrant \u2013 independence of the judiciary: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Openbaar Ministerie<\/a><\/td>17.12.2020<\/td>joined cases C-354\/20 PPU and C-412\/20 PPU<\/td>European arrest warrant, judicial independence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
German Constitutional Court<\/td>German Federal Constitutional Court allows complaints against the execution of European arrest warrants<\/a><\/td>01.12.2020<\/td>2 BvR 1845\/18 and 2 BvR 2100\/18<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Right of asylum seekers to be heard: judgment of the CJEU in the Addis case.<\/a><\/td>16.07.2020<\/td>C-517\/17<\/td>migration, right to be heard<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>International child abduction: judgment of the ECHR in the case of Michnea v. Romania<\/a><\/td>07.07.2020<\/td>10395\/19<\/td>international child abductions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Detention of asylum seekers in the R\u00f6szke transit zone: judgment by the CJEU in the case of FMS and Others<\/a><\/td>14.05.2020<\/td>joined cases C-924\/19 PPU and C -925\/19 PPU<\/td>migration, detention<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of \u201cAGRO IN 2001\u201d<\/a><\/td>19.03.2020<\/td>C-234\/18<\/td>confiscation of assets<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>On the notion of safe third country: judgment of the CJEU in the case of Bev\u00e1ndorl\u00e1si \u00e9s Menek\u00fclt\u00fcgyi Hivatal<\/a><\/td>19.03.2020<\/td>C-564\/18<\/td>migration, safe third country<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in the case of Sanofi Pasteur v. France<\/a><\/td>13.02.2020<\/td>25137\/16<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Deutsche Umwelthilfe<\/a><\/td>19.12.2019<\/td>C-752\/18<\/td>right to an effective remedy, right to liberty<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Centraal Justitieel Incassobureau<\/a><\/td>05.12.2019<\/td>C-671\/18<\/td>mutual recognition, financial penalties<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>21.11.2019<\/td>47287\/15<\/td>migration, detention, ill-treatment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of A.K. and Others (Independence of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court)<\/a><\/td>19.11.2019<\/td>Joined Cases C-585\/18, C-624\/18 and C-625\/I8<\/td>judicial independence, effective judicial protection<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
German Constitutional Court<\/td>Landmark judgments of the German Constitutional Court (\u201cRight to be forgotten\u201d I and II)<\/a><\/td>06.11.2019<\/td>1 BvR 16\/13, 1 BvR 276\/17<\/td>right to be forgotten<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of AH and Others<\/a><\/td>05.11.2019<\/td>C -377\/18<\/td>presumption of innocence<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Dorobantu<\/a><\/td>15.10.2019<\/td>C-128\/18<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Rayonna prokuratura Lom<\/a><\/td>19.09.2019<\/td>C -467\/18<\/td>procedural rights in criminal proceedings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Funke Medien<\/a><\/td>29.07.2019<\/td>C -469\/17<\/td>freedom of expression<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Gambino and Hyka<\/a><\/td>29.07.2019<\/td>C-38\/18<\/td>fair trial<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Romeo Casta\u00f1o v. Belgium<\/a><\/td>09.07.2019<\/td>8351\/17<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Mihalache v. Romania<\/a><\/td>08.07.2019<\/td>54012\/10<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Decision of the ECHR in Melvin West v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>25.06.2019<\/td>5380\/12<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Nodet v. France<\/a><\/td>06.06.2019<\/td>47342\/14<\/td>non bis in idem<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in the case of O.C.I. and Others v. Romania<\/a><\/td>21.05.2019<\/td>49450\/17<\/td>international child abductions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Repcevirag Sz\u00f6vetkezet v. Hungary<\/a><\/td>30.04.2019<\/td>70750\/14<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Baltic Master Ltd. v. Lithuania<\/a><\/td>16.04.2019<\/td>55092\/16<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>Judgment of the ECHR in Harisch v. Germany<\/a><\/td>11.04.2019<\/td>50053\/16<\/td>preliminary rulings<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of Jawo v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland<\/a><\/td>19.03.2019<\/td>C-163\/17<\/td>migration, Dublin Regulation, systemic deficiencies<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CJEU<\/td>Judgment of the CJEU in the case of TC<\/a><\/td>12.02.2019<\/td>C-492\/18 PPU<\/td>European arrest warrant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>AFFAIRE PIROZZI c. BELGIQUE<\/a><\/td>17.04.2018<\/td>21055\/11<\/td>In Pirozzi v. Belgium (17.4.2018) the ECHR applied the Avoti\u0146\u0161-jurisprudence to the execution of a European Arrest Warrant. <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
ECtHR<\/td>AFFAIRE THIMOTHAWES c. BELGIQUE<\/a><\/td>04.04.2017<\/td>39061\/11<\/td>In Thimothawes v. Belgium (4.4.2017) the ECHR explained the impact of EU law when assessing compliance with Article 5 of the Convention of a detention ordered by virtue of domestic law transposing the Reception Directive.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the table below you will find the full list of all posts relating to recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union \u2013 next to some other Courts \u2013 which have been commented upon in the \u201cNews\u201d section because they illustrate the ongoing interaction […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1007","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"translation":{"provider":"WPGlobus","version":"3.0.2","language":"fr","enabled_languages":["en","de","fr"],"languages":{"en":{"title":true,"content":true,"excerpt":false},"de":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false},"fr":{"title":false,"content":false,"excerpt":false}}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1007","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1007"}],"version-history":[{"count":81,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1007\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2898,"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1007\/revisions\/2898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/johan-callewaert.eu\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1007"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}