Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 25 February 2025.XL v Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku.References for a preliminary ruling – Freezing or reduction of remuneration in the national public administration – Measures specifically aimed at judges – Article 2 TEU – Article 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Obligations on Member States to provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective judicial protection – Principle of judicial independence – Powers of the legislatures and executives of the Member States to set the detailed rules for determining judges’ remuneration – Possibility of derogating from those rules – Conditions.Case C-146/23.

Here’s a detailed analysis of this Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) judgment:

1. Essence of the act in 3-5 sentences:
This is a landmark CJEU judgment that establishes key principles regarding judicial remuneration in EU Member States. The Court ruled on whether and how national legislatures and executives can determine and modify judges’ salaries while respecting judicial independence. The judgment sets out specific requirements that must be met when establishing judges’ pay and when implementing any derogations from established remuneration rules.

2. Structure and main provisions:
The judgment addresses two joined cases (C-146/23 and C-374/23) concerning judges’ remuneration in Poland and Lithuania. Its key structural elements include:

– Analysis of Court’s jurisdiction and admissibility
– Interpretation of Article 19(1) TEU and Article 2 TEU regarding judicial independence
– Establishment of two sets of requirements:
a) For determining regular judicial remuneration
b) For implementing derogations from standard remuneration rules
– Application of principles to specific cases
– Final ruling with detailed conditions

Main changes compared to previous versions:
This judgment develops and clarifies previous CJEU case law on judicial independence, particularly regarding remuneration. It provides more detailed and specific requirements than earlier judgments on this topic.

3. Most important provisions for use:

The judgment establishes several crucial requirements:

For regular determination of judicial remuneration:
– Must be provided for by law
– Rules must be objective, foreseeable, stable and transparent
– Must ensure remuneration commensurate with judicial functions
– Must be subject to effective judicial review

For derogating measures:
– Must be provided for by law
– Must be objective and transparent
– Must be justified by general interest
– Should affect broader categories of public servants, not just judges
– Must be exceptional and temporary
– Cannot undermine the commensurate nature of judicial remuneration
– Must be subject to effective judicial review

: This judgment has particular implications for Ukraine as it establishes standards that would need to be met in Ukraine’s judicial system as part of its EU accession process and ongoing judicial reforms.

Full text by link