Case: Joined cases C-585/18, C-624/18 y C-625/18 - A.K. and others v. Poland

Descriptors: Equal treatment / No discrimination based on age / Retirement’s age reduction

Against the new Supreme Court’s Law, three Polish judges initiate litigation for, among other reasons, their forced retirement on reaching 65 years old. These disputes are up to decision of a new Disciplinary Chamber of the Polish Supreme Court, a body that raises, according to the Labor and Social Security of the same SC (preliminary questions referring body), legitimate doubts about its impartiality and neutrality regarding the Executive Power, specifically.

In this way, and interpreting articles 2 and 19 TEU, 267 TFEU, 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and 9 of Directive 2000/78/CE, the Court of Justice of the European Union rules that such provisions preclude litigation relating to the application of Union Law falls within the competence of a body that is not and independent and impartial court. The impartial nature of this body is questioned when the objective conditions in which it was created, its characteristics and its member’s appointment arouse public uncertainty as to the body’s impermeability in the face of external elements (such as direct or indirect influences of the Legislature and Executive) and in terms of its neutrality regarding the interests face in litigation.

The Court of Justice of the European Union indicates that it is up to the referring authority to determine whether the SC Disciplinary Chamber has the necessary conditions of impartiality and neutrality and, if not, supremacy’s principle of Union Law must be interpreted in the sense that referring body must inapply the national law’s provision that reserves competence to hear main disputes to that Disciplinary Chamber.

Read the judgement