Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 14 November 2024.S. S.A. v C. sp. z o.o.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Remedies – Effective judicial protection – Independent and impartial tribunal established by law – National rules governing the random allocation of cases to the judges of a court and the modification of the formations of the court – Provision precluding reliance on the infringements of those rules in appeal proceedings.Case C-197/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of EU law regarding judicial independence and effective legal protection in the context of case allocation rules in national courts. Here are the key points:Essence of the act:
The Court of Justice ruled that EU law precludes national provisions that prevent appellate courts from reviewing whether case reallocation between judges was done in compliance with national rules. The case specifically addressed a Polish law that prohibited such review. The Court emphasized that effective judicial protection requires the possibility to review compliance with rules that ensure courts are independent, impartial and properly established.Structure and main provisions:
The judgment analyzes several key legal aspects:- The scope of EU law requirements regarding judicial independence- The concept of a ‘tribunal previously established by law’- The necessity of judicial review of case allocation rules- The relationship between national procedural autonomy and EU law requirementsMost important provisions:
1. Member States must ensure that courts ruling on EU law matters meet requirements of effective judicial protection and independence2. Judicial independence has both external and internal aspects – protection from outside influence and impartiality3. The requirement of a ‘tribunal established by law’ covers not just the legal basis for court existence but also proper composition in each case4. National rules preventing review of case allocation compliance violate EU law requirements for effective judicial protection