80Having regard to all the foregoing, the answer to the first and third questions and the first part of the fourth question referred in Case C‑671/20 is that the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, the principle of the primacy of EU law and the principle of sincere cooperation must be interpreted as meaning:– first, that a formation of a national court, to which a case which hitherto had been assigned to another formation of that court has been re-assigned – as a result of a resolution adopted by a body whose independence and impartiality are not guaranteed and which authorised the initiation of criminal proceedings against the single Judge comprising the latter formation and ordered his or her suspension from duties and a reduction in his or her remuneration – and which has decided to suspend the handling of that case pending a decision by the Court of Justice on a preliminary ruling, must disapply that resolution and refrain from continuing to examine that case and,– secondly, that the judicial bodies which have power to designate and modify the composition of the formations of that national court are required, in such a situation, to assign that case back to the formation initially hearing it.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.