LegalPost.eu

The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to the pr

The European Court of Human Rights has refused the request for an advisory opinion (no. P16-2024-001) received from the High Court of Cassation and Justice of Romania (“the High Court”) on 27 February 2024.  The request was submitted in the context of an appeal pending before the High Court, concerning the confiscation of a sum of money from a civil servant following an audit of her assets by the National Integrity Agency (Agenția Națională de Integritate – “the ANI”).  The Romanian authorities had considered that the civil servant – who belonged to one of the 39 categories of individuals working in the public sector who were required to declare their assets and interests – had been unable to prove the source of the money, which had been confiscated following an audit of her income.  The High Court requested the European Court to give an opinion on two questions concerning the interpretation of Article 6 (right to a fair hearing) of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 1

As ruled by the Judgment of the Court of EU in Case C-774/22 (29.7.2024) (FTI Touristik), a consumer having booked a trip abroad may sue the organiser before the court of the place of his or her domicile. This is also true where the consumer and the organiser are domiciled in the same Member State. A consumer residing in Nuremberg (Germany) concluded a contract for a trip abroad with the tour operator FTI Touristik, which has its registered seat in Munich (Germany). Considering himself to have been inadequately informed of the entry conditions and necessary visas, the consumer brought an action for damages against FTI Touristik before the Local Court, Nuremberg. FTI Touristik contends that that court does not have territorial jurisdiction.  In particular, the ‘Brussels Ia’ Regulation on jurisdiction [1] [2], does not apply where the two parties are domiciled in the same Member State. The Local Court, Nuremberg submitted a question to the Court of Justice on that point.  The Court repli

The European Commission has published its fifth  annual Rule of Law Report,  examining systematically and objectively rule of law developments in all Member States on an equal basis. In comparison to the first issue of the Rule of Law Report adopted in 2020, Member States and the EU as a whole are much better prepared to detect, prevent and address emerging challenges. This contributes to the resilience of our European democracies and to mutual trust in the EU. It also contributes to a good functioning of the single market and benefits a business environment that fosters competitiveness and sustainable growth. Since its first publication in 2020, the report has become a true driver of positive reforms: Two thirds (68%) of the recommendations issued in 2023 have been, fully or partially, addressed. However, in some Member States systematic concerns remain and the situation has further deteriorated. These concerns are addressed in the recommendations of this year's report. There

According to the Judgment of the European Court of Justice in Case C-450/22 (Caixabank and Others) as regards mortgage loans, the transparency of ‘floor’ clauses may be reviewed in the context of a collective action concerning the entire banking system of a country. In its review, the court may take account of changes in the perception of the average consumer in relation to those clauses. ‘Floor’ clauses are standard terms that were contained in variable-rate mortgage loan agreements concluded with consumers by a significant number of financial institutions in Spain.  Those clauses set a threshold (or ‘floor’) below which the variable interest rate could not fall, even if the reference rate (generally the Euribor) fell below it. Several thousands of lawsuits were filed in Spain claiming the illegality of ‘floor’ clauses in the light of the Directive on unfair terms[1][2] .  The Spanish association of users of banks, savings banks and insurance (ADICAE) brought a collective action again

The International Court of Justice has given on 19.7.2024 its Advisory Opinion in respect of the Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. It is recalled that, on 30 December 2022, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted resolution A/RES/77/247 in which, referring to Article 65 of the Statute of the Court, it requested the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on the following questions: “(a) What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and from its adoption of related discriminatory legislation and measures? (b) How do the policies and practice

Council of Europe anti-torture Committee again calls on Greece to reform its immigration detention system and stop pushbacks. In a  report  on its ad hoc visit to Greece, which took place from 21 November to 1 December 2023, published together with the  response of the Greek authorities , the Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ( CPT ) once again urges the Greek authorities to improve the conditions in the country’s immigration detention facilities, and especially the newly-built and EU-funded centres on the Aegean islands, while ensuring that foreign nationals are treated both with dignity and humanity (see the executive summary of the report in  English  or in  Greek ). The main objective of the November 2023 visit to Greece was to examine the treatment of foreign nationals deprived of their liberty under immigration legislation in pre-removal detention centres, in police and border guard stations and in

During its latest plenary, the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) adopted an Opinion on the use of facial recognition technologies by airport operators and airline companies to streamline the passenger flow at airports [1] . This Article 64(2) Opinion, following a request from the French Data Protection Authority, addresses a matter of general application and produces effects in more than one Member State. EDPB Chair Anu Talus said:  “More and more airport operators and airline companies around the world are piloting facial recognition systems allowing passengers to go more easily through the various checkpoints. It is important to be aware that biometric data are particularly sensitive and that their processing can create significant risks for individuals. Facial recognition technology can lead to false negatives, bias and discrimination. Misuse of biometric data can also have grave consequences, such as identity fraud or impersonation. Therefore, we urge airline companies and

According to the Judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-284/23 (Haus Jacobus) a pregnant worker must be afforded a reasonable time limit in order to be able to bring an action against her dismissal. A two-week time limit for making a request for leave to intervene appears to be insufficient.  A care-home employee challenges her dismissal before a German labour court. She relies on the prohibition of dismissal for pregnant women. The labour court considers that the action should normally be dismissed on the ground that it was brought out of time.  When the employee became aware of her pregnancy and brought the action, the ordinary time limit of three weeks following notification in writing of the dismissal, laid down by German law, had already lapsed. Furthermore, the employee failed to submit a request for leave to bring an action out of time within the additional time limit of two weeks [1] laid down by that law.  The labour court asks, however, whether the German legislation at i

In Chamber's judgment in the case of Daniel Karsai v. Hungary (application no. 32312/23) the European Court of Human Rights held, by 6 votes to 1, that there had been no violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights; and no violation of Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) in conjunction with Article 8.  The case concerned the question of the asserted right to self-determined death of the applicant, who is a Hungarian national and has advanced amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) a type of motor neurone disease with no known cure.  He would like to be able to decide when and how to die before his illness reaches a stage that he finds intolerable. He would need assistance, but anyone assisting him would risk prosecution, even if he died in a country which allowed physician-assisted dying. He complained of not being able to end his life with the help of others and of discrimination compared to terminally ill pati

Prison overcrowding continues to be an acute and persistent problem in a significant number of European prison administrations, according to the Council of Europe’s Annual Penal Statistics on Prison Populations ( SPACE I ) for 2023. In countries with over 500,000 inhabitants, twelve prison administrations reported having more inmates than places available in January 2023. Overall, in Europe, the number of prisoners per 100 places available grew by 2% from 31 January 2022 to 31 January 2023 (from 91.7 to 93.5 inmates). Seven prison administrations reported a prison density of more than 105 inmates per 100 places available, indicating severe overcrowding: Cyprus (166 inmates per 100 places), Romania (120), France (119), Belgium (115), Hungary (112), Italy (109) and Slovenia (107). Five prison administrations reported very high prison density: Greece (103), Sweden (102), North Macedonia (101), Croatia (101) and Türkiye (100). Other administrations reported a prison density below 100 but

According to the Judgment of the General Court in Case T-58/23 (Supermac’s v EUIPO), McDonald’s loses the EU trade mark Big Mac in respect of poultry products. The General Court holds that McDonald’s has not proved genuine use within a continuous period of five years in the European Union in connection with certain goods and services. Supermac’s and McDonald’s, an Irish and American fast-food chain respectively, are involved in a dispute regarding the EU trade mark Big Mac. That trade mark had been registered for McDonald’s in 1996. In 2017, Supermac’s filed an application for revocation of that mark in relation to certain goods and services. It submitted that the mark had not been put to genuine use in the European Union in connection with those goods and services within a continuous period of five years.  The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) partially upheld that application. However, it confirmed the protection which the contested mark conferred on McDonald’s in r

In its final decision in the case of Mikyas and Others v. Belgium (application no. 50681/20) the European Court of Human Rights has, by a majority, declared the application inadmissible. The case concerned three young women who identify as Muslims.  They complained that they were unable to wear the Islamic headscarf in their secondary schools (except during religious education classes), following the prohibition on wearing any visible symbols of one’s beliefs in the official education system of the Flemish Community.  The Court stated that the concept of neutrality in the Community’s education system, understood as prohibiting, in a general manner, the wearing by pupil of visible symbols of one’s beliefs, did not in itself run counter to Article 9 of the Convention and the values underlying it.  The Court noted in the present case that the contested ban did not concern solely the Islamic veil, but applied without distinction to all visible symbols of belief. It considered that the nati