EU Law Radar

Monitoring References to the Court of Justice of the European Union

Tag

charter

71 case reports

Case C-40/26 P, Amazon EU v Commission – a marketplace is not a social network

Amazon was designated a very large online platform under the Digital Services Act and lost its challenge in November 2025. It now tells the Court that a marketplace carries none of the 'systemic risks' the Act was written for, and that treating it like a social network breaches the Charter. The Commission has cross-appealed, saying the General Court should never have looked.

Case C-703/26, Dosilev – when harsher custody counts for more

A Sofia court sentencing a drug offender must deduct time spent on remand — but that remand was served in conditions significantly worse than the law allows. It asks whether Article 49 of the Charter requires harsher days to count for more, and whether any surplus can be banked against a future sentence.

Case C-588/26, Tetilovi – the same tariff in a different hand

The Court has twice told Bulgaria that mandatory minimum lawyers' fees set by the bar offend Article 101 TFEU. Bulgaria then moved the appointment of court-appointed representatives, and the setting of their fees, to the bar councils. A Blagoevgrad court asks in twenty-five questions whether that is the same restriction in new clothes.

Case C-609/26, Luxembourg Business Registers II – a condition defined as itself

Four years after the Court struck down public access to beneficial ownership registers, the replacement directive lets Member States shield an owner in 'exceptional circumstances to be laid down in national law'. Luxembourg defined those circumstances as the very risk that already triggers the shield. The Tribunal d'arrondissement asks what is left of the condition.

Case C-700/26, Aspebrink – what a withheld name costs a child

A parent withheld information about who the father of their child is. Sweden asks whether the EU law principle against fraud allows a derived right of residence under Article 20 TFEU to be refused — a right that exists for the child's sake, not the parent's.

Case C-570/26, Ariel – compelled to speak so the machine can listen

Bulgarian prosecutors want voice samples from a suspect and propose to get them by compelling answers to harmless questions, on pain of a fine or criminal consequences. Sofia City Court asks whether the right not to incriminate oneself permits it — and the answer turns on a list in a recital.

Case C-546/26, Ministar na zdraveopazvaneto – a health record with no filter

Bulgaria's national health system holds every diagnosis, prescription and operation a person has had, and opens the whole file to doctors, insurers and prosecutors with no technical limit on what they read. Six questions from the Supreme Administrative Court ask whether Article 9 GDPR permits any of it.

Case C-159/25, Rowicz – the generator that picks your judge

A Polish judge was released from her cases against the rules, and the replacement was drawn by a random-allocation system built by the Ministry of Justice whose source code nobody may inspect. Is a court composed that way still a tribunal established by law? The Warsaw Regional Court asks.

Case C-449/26, Freie Hansestadt Bremen – must the risk be assessed twice?

One authority withdraws international protection and finds no risk of ill-treatment. A second authority then orders removal. Must it examine that risk again from the beginning — and what happens to evidence the person could have produced earlier but did not? The Bremen administrative court asks.

Case C-446/26, Blerens – who reviews a prosecutor's European arrest warrant?

An EAW issued by a public prosecutor with no pre-surrender judicial review, resting on a national warrant whose judge never assessed proportionality: the Rechtbank Amsterdam asks whether the 'dual level of protection' is still real. Answered by reasoned order on 2 July 2026: it is, provided the issuing State offers judicial review after surrender.