1781Case C-140/26, Delta Group: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije (Slovenia) lodged on 26 February 2026 – DELTA GROUP, družba za varovanje, v Republika Slovenijacjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1782Case C-134/26, Bildungsdirektion für Niederösterreich: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Austria) lodged on 26 February 2026 – NQ and ZI represented by the mother of JFcjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1783Case C-131/26, Alsadán: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Instancia de Peñaranda de Bracamonte, Sección Civil y de Instrucción, plaza n.o 1 (Spain) lodged on 26 February 2026 – Investcapital Ltd v EWcjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1784Case T-687/25: Order of the General Court of 26 February 2026 – MR v Councilcjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1785Opinion of Advocate General Szpunar delivered on 26 February 2026.###cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1786Conclusions de l'avocat général M. M. Campos Sánchez-Bordona, présentées le 26 février 2026.###cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1787Opinion of Advocate General Ćapeta delivered on 26 February 2026.###cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1788Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona delivered on 26 February 2026.###cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1789Case C-283/25, Stellantis Europe: Order of the President of the Court of 26 February 2026 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Ravensburg – Germany) – NM, FY, GU, IS, OQ v Stellantis Europe S.p.A.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1790Order of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 26 February 2026.#Christofer Edge v European Investment Bank.#Action for annulment – Civil service – EIB Staff – Period within which proceedings must be commenced – Article 41a of the Staff Regulations of the EIB – Calculation of time limits – Not admissible.#Case T-267/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1791Order of the General Court (Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition) of 26 February 2026.#Christofer Edge v European Investment Bank.#Action for annulment – Civil service – EIB staff – Period within which proceedings must be commenced – Article 41a of the Staff Regulations of the EIB – Calculation of time limits – Not admissible.#Case T-267/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1792Case T-267/24: Order of the General Court of 26 February 2026 – Edge v EIB (Action for annulment – Civil service – EIB staff – Period within which proceedings must be commenced – Article 41a of the Staff Regulations of the EIB – Calculation of time limits – Not admissible)cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1793Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#VG v Zastępca Rzecznika Dyscyplinarnego przy Sądzie Okręgowym w Gdańsku.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Rule of law – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Effective legal protection in the fields covered by EU law – Judicial independence – Izba Odpowiedzialności Zawodowej (Chamber of Professional Responsibility) of the Sąd Najwyższy (Supreme Court, Poland) – Possibility of calling into question a final disciplinary conviction at the stage of a procedure for the cumulation of penalties – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-517/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1794Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#VG v Zastępca Rzecznika Dyscyplinarnego przy Sądzie Okręgowym w Gdańsku.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Dyscyplinarny przy Sądzie Apelacyjnym w Gdańsku.#Case C-517/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1795Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#PRVO PLINARSKO DRUŠTVO d.o.o. v Gazprom export LLC and Privredna banka Zagreb d.d.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Article 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU – Effective judicial protection in matters covered by EU law – Independence of judges – Court established in advance by law – Fair trial – National legislation providing for the establishment of a ‘registration judge’ in courts of second instance who, in practice, has the power to suspend the delivery of a judgment – Incompatibility of that practice – Final nature of the judgment concerned – Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 – Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 – Irrelevance of the interpretation sought – Hypothetical question – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-403/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1796Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#PRVO PLINARSKO DRUŠTVO d.o.o. v Gazprom export LLC and Privredna banka Zagreb d.d.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Visoki trgovački sud Republike Hrvatske.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Article 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU – Effective judicial protection in matters covered by EU law – Independence of judges – Court established in advance by law – Fair trial – National legislation providing for the establishment of a ‘registration judge’ in courts of second instance who, in practice, has the power to suspend the delivery of a judgment – Incompatibility of that practice – Final nature of the judgment concerned – Regulation (EU) 2020/1998 – Decision (CFSP) 2020/1999 – Irrelevance of the interpretation sought – Hypothetical question – Manifest inadmissibility.#Case C-403/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1797Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium.#Case C-824/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1798Arrêt de la Cour (première chambre) du 26 février 2026.#Umweltorganisation VIRUS – Verein Projektwerkstatt für Umwelt und Soziales e.a. contre Land Niederösterreich e.a.#Renvoi préjudiciel – Environnement – Conservation des oiseaux sauvages – Directive 2009/147/CE – Interdiction de perturber intentionnellement des oiseaux – Article 5, sous d) – Projet de construction d’une route entraînant la possibilité d’une perturbation de certains spécimens de certaines espèces – Mesures de prévention et d’atténuation des perturbations – Preuve de l’efficacité de ces mesures – Évaluation motivée d’un expert judiciaire.#Affaire C-131/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1799Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 February 2026.#Umweltorganisation VIRUS – Verein Projektwerkstatt für Umwelt und Soziales and Others v Amt der Niederösterreichischen Landesregierung, Abteilung Landesstraßenplanung – ST3.#Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht.#Reference for a preliminary ruling – Environment – Conservation of wild birds – Directive 2009/147/EC – Prohibition on deliberately disturbing birds – Article 5(d) – Project for the construction of a road involving the possibility of disturbing certain specimens of certain species – Measures for preventing and mitigating disturbances – Proof of the effectiveness of those measures – Reasoned assessment of a court expert.#Case C-131/24.cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.
1800Opinion of Advocate General Spielmann delivered on 26 February 2026.###cjeu_case · 26 февраля 2026 г.