Vezi raport EN

2024

ACTIVITY

REPORT

Group of Romania’s Government Agent for the Court of Justice of the European Union, in

FOREWORD

consensus with all other Working Group members, appreciated that it was not relevant to

ANALYSIS OF PETITIONS

REGISTERED WITH N.C.C.D. IN 2024

                                     submit written observations in the above-mentioned case.
ANALYSIS OF N.C.C.D. FILES IN 2024     • Analysis on the relevance of filing written observations in the foreign case C-757/24,
 ANALYSIS OF CASE PROCESSING             Gemeinde Wien submitted by an Austrian referring court. Following the analysis on

BASED ON THE DECISIONS ISSUED

BY THE N.C.C.D.‘ STEERING BOARD          the relevance of filing written observations in this foreign case, in light of the legal
          EXAMPLES BASED ON              grounds and of the impact a CJEU judgment ruled in this case would have on Romania,

CASE-LAW OF FINDINGS MADE BY

THE N.C.C.D.’ STEERING BOARD

                                         N.C.C.D. representatives, which are members of the Working Group of Romania’s Gov-
                                         ernment Agent for the Court of Justice of the European Union, in consensus with all
          ACTIVITY OF                    other Working Group members, appreciated that it was not relevant to submit written

THE LEGAL

DIRECTORATE

                                         observations in the above-mentioned case.
       DISCRIMINATION-RELATED          • Specialist legal opinion on case C-762/23, where Bucharest Court of Appeal referred

ISSUES IN ROMANIA REFLECTED

     IN INTERNATIONAL REPORTS            the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: “Must the sec-
        NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR             ond subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU (read in conjunction with Article 2 TEU) be

COMBATING DISCRIMINATION

IN MASS-MEDIA

interpreted as meaning that the principle of judicial independence precludes the repeal,

FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL DATA

in respect of Romanian judges with 20 consecutive years’ service in the judiciary, of the right to receive, on retirement or on termination of service for other reasons not attributable to them, a sum equal to seven gross monthly seniority allowances, in the event that the exercise of that right to remuneration is suspended prior to repeal, on a continuous basis and for a prolonged period, for reasons connected principally to the need to eliminate an excessive budget deficit (the legislature expressly invokes the threshold of 3 % of gross domestic product laid down in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union)?”

                                              TABLE OF CONTENTS     CONTACT:    WEBSITE      EMAIL      ADDRESS      FACEBOOK       69