# C_2023173EN.01002201.xml

| 15.5.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 173/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 173/22

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas (Lithuania) lodged on 28 February 2023 — Virgilijus Valančius v Lietuvos Respublikos vyriausybė

(Case C-119/23, Valančius)

(2023/C 173/30)

Language of the case: Lithuanian

Referring court

Vilniaus apygardos administracinis teismas

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Virgilijus Valančius

Defendant: Lietuvos Respublikos vyriausybė

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 254 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 19(2) of the Treaty on European Union, which provides that the members of the General Court of the European Union are to be chosen from persons ‘whose independence is beyond doubt and who possess the ability required for appointment to high judicial office’, require that a candidate for appointment to the General Court of the European Union be selected in a Member State of the European Union exclusively on the basis of professional ability? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 254 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 19(2) of the Treaty on European Union, which provides that the members of the General Court of the European Union are to be chosen from persons ‘whose independence is beyond doubt and who possess the ability required for appointment to high judicial office’, require that a candidate for appointment to the General Court of the European Union be selected in a Member State of the European Union exclusively on the basis of professional ability?

| 2. | Is a national practice, such as that at issue in the present case, whereby, in order to ensure the transparency of the selection of a particular candidate, the Government of a Member State responsible for proposing a candidate for appointment to the office of Judge of the General Court of the European Union establishes a group of independent experts to assess the candidates, which, after interviewing all the candidates, draws up a ranked list of the candidates on the basis of clear and objective selection criteria laid down in advance and, in accordance with the conditions announced in advance, puts forward to the Government the candidate who has been ranked the highest on the basis of his or her professional ability and competence, but the Government proposes for appointment as a Judge of the European Union a candidate other than the candidate in first place on the ranked list, compatible with the requirement that the independence of the judge be beyond doubt and with the other requirements for judicial office laid down in Article 254 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 19(2) of the Treaty on European Union, taking account of the fact that a judge who may have been appointed unlawfully might influence the decisions of the General Court of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is a national practice, such as that at issue in the present case, whereby, in order to ensure the transparency of the selection of a particular candidate, the Government of a Member State responsible for proposing a candidate for appointment to the office of Judge of the General Court of the European Union establishes a group of independent experts to assess the candidates, which, after interviewing all the candidates, draws up a ranked list of the candidates on the basis of clear and objective selection criteria laid down in advance and, in accordance with the conditions announced in advance, puts forward to the Government the candidate who has been ranked the highest on the basis of his or her professional ability and competence, but the Government proposes for appointment as a Judge of the European Union a candidate other than the candidate in first place on the ranked list, compatible with the requirement that the independence of the judge be beyond doubt and with the other requirements for judicial office laid down in Article 254 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, read in conjunction with Article 19(2) of the Treaty on European Union, taking account of the fact that a judge who may have been appointed unlawfully might influence the decisions of the General Court of the European Union?

---