Court of Justice of the European Communities

This author's articles

• CASE OF S. AND MARPER v. THE UNITED KINGDOM

  5 December 2008
  The European Court of Human Rights has today delivered at a public hearing its Grand Chamber judgment1 in the case of S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom (application nos. 30562/04 and 30566/04). The Court held unanimously that ...

• Judgment of the Court of Justice in Joined Cases C-402/05 P and C-415/05 P : Yassin Abdullah Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v Council and Commission

  22 September 2008
  Setting aside the judgments of the Court of First Instance, the Court rules that the Community judicature has jurisdiction to review measures adopted by the Community giving effect to resolutions of the Security Council of the United Nations. In exercising that jurisdiction, it considers that the regulation infringes Mr Kadi and Al Barakaat’s fundamental rights under Community law

• Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-127/08

  13 August 2008
  The right of a national of a non-member country who is a family member of a Union citizen to accompany or join that citizen cannot be made conditional on prior lawful residence in another Member State.

• ECJ – Promusicae v. Telefonica de Espana SAU, C-275/06

  5 February 2008
  Community law does not require the Member States, in order to ensure the effective protection of copyright, to lay down an obligation to disclose personal data in the context of civil proceedings. An important judgment on the reconciliation of data protection requirements and the right to property.

• EC criminal law competence – judgment of the Court in case C-440/05

  29 October 2007
  The Court of Justice annuls the Council Framework Decision to strengthen the criminal-law framework for the enforcement of the law against ship-source pollution due to its adoption outside the Community legislative framework

• ECJ Grand Chamber Judgment delivered on validity of EAW and surrender procedures between Member States

  14 May 2007
  In 2004, the non-governmental organization «Advocaten voor de Wereld» brought an action before the Court of Arbitration of Belgium seeking invalidation of the Belgian Law transposing into national law the provision of the Council Framework Decision of 13th of June 2002 (2002/584/JHA) on the execution of the European Arrest Warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States.

• The Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States is valid

  14 May 2007
  The purpose of the Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States is to introduce a simplified system for the surrender, as between judicial authorities, of convicted persons or suspects for the purpose of enforcing judgments or conducting criminal proceedings

• La décision-cadre relative au mandat d’arrêt européen et aux procédures de remise entre Etats membres est valide

  9 mai 2007
  La suppression du contrôle de la double incrimination est conforme au principe de légalité ainsi qu’au principe d’égalité et de non-discrimination

• ECJ, Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-354/04 P and 355/04 P

  28 February 2007
  The Court of Justice rejects the appeals brought by the applicants claiming compensation following their inclusion on the list of persons, groups or entities involved in acts of terrorism, stating that the appellants are not deprived of all effective judicial protection and the orders of the Court of First Instance do not prejudice their right to such protection.

• The European Court of Justice has held today that the agreement between the Commission and the USA was unlawful

  31 May 2006
  Following the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the United States passed legislation in November 2001 providing that air carriers operating flights to or from the United States or across United States territory had to provide the United States customs authorities with electronic access to the data contained in their automated reservation and departure control systems, referred to as ’Passenger Name Records’ (hereinafter ’PNR data’). While acknowledging the legitimacy of the security interests at stake, the Commission informed the United States authorities, in June 2002, that those provisions could come into conflict with Community and Member State legislation on data protection and with certain provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2299/89 of 24 July 1989 on a code of conduct for computerised reservation systems (OJ 1989 L 220, p. 1), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 323/1999 of 8 February 1999 (OJ 1999 L 40, p. 1).

0 | 10