Swedish Customs announced on 6 November that a 38-year-old man faces prosecution for organising seven drug shipments from Spain. The agency says Sky ECC and EncroChat messages link him to the smuggling of 1.6 tonnes of drugs.

On 3 November, the Dutch Supreme Court declared an appeal inadmissible concerning the removal of EncroChat and Sky ECC data from a criminal file. The separate complaint procedure offered no route to that remedy.

Berlin Regional Court ruled the messages inadmissible on 1 July 2021. The Berlin Court of Appeal overturned that decision on 30 August 2021.

On 19 January 2026, the Tribunal of Imperia refused EncroChat material attributed by prosecutors to Luca Rinaldi. A court-appointed expert could not examine how the French data had been filtered and structured.

Austria’s Supreme Court rejected objections to Sky ECC evidence in a heroin case on 7 January 2026. Only the confiscation of objects required a fresh hearing; the other parts of the judgment were left intact by this decision.

The Court of Appeal refused Nana Oppong’s renewed applications on 24 July 2026. The arguments included the previous conviction put before the jury after his allegations about manipulated evidence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Gary Hughes’s sentence appeal on 6 October 2026. The cash handler, who used the name Guppy Salah, had admitted nine money-laundering offences.

On 25 June 2026, The Hague District Court imposed five years in prison for cocaine offences, preparing arms trafficking and money laundering. It rejected the request to exclude Sky ECC messages.

On 26 June 2026 The Hague District Court sentenced a father and son to six and a half and six years in the Awarra investigation. It used encrypted chats as evidence. It found privacy violations in separate phone and APN inquiries without excluding evidence.

On 7 March 2025 the Federal Supreme Court declined a Canadian suspect’s appeal against extradition to France. It found that he had not demonstrated an exceptionally important case meeting the statutory threshold for this appeal.

The Norwegian Supreme Court’s appeals selection committee refused three appeals in HR-2024-647-U on 8 April 2024. The convicted defendants challenged Sky ECC evidence because they could not inspect all the underlying information.

On 9 January 2025 the Federal Court of Justice rejected a challenge to French Sky ECC evidence in case 1 StR 142/24. The judgment nevertheless required reconsideration under Germany’s changed cannabis law.

On 16 December 2024 the High Court in Northern Ireland refused leave for judicial review of Markey’s committal for trial. His objections concerned written statements from French investigator Jeremy Decou.

On 26 February 2026 France’s Conseil d’État dismissed a challenge to an extradition decree. The applicant disputed, among other things, his ability to challenge French Sky ECC evidence in Montenegro.

On 5 August 2026 the Federal Supreme Court held that an immediate appeal against Zurich’s exclusion of Sky ECC data was inadmissible. Prosecutors could challenge the evidence ruling together with the later final judgment.

Mark Dunford received ten years and six months in an EncroChat case on 11 September 2026, following guilty pleas in November 2025. Earlier, on 6 September 2024, the judge had rejected his request for additional technical material.

GE appealed the rejection of his damages claim against Eurojust and Europol on 25 March 2026. The official notice of 8 June links case C-240/26 P with T-587/24.

DG appealed the rejection of his Sky ECC damages claim on 31 March 2026. The official notice appeared on 22 June. The proceedings are numbered T-167/24 and C-274/26 P.

France’s Court of Cassation annulled a Douai decision on 31 March 2026 concerning a challenge to French investigative acts involving Sky ECC data. It held that the Paris investigating chamber had jurisdiction because a Paris investigating judge executed the Lithuanian investigation orders.

On 13 October, Noord-Holland District Court refused to postpone a major drugs trial pending the European Prudniez proceedings. It used Sky ECC messages as evidence and sentenced the defendant to five years and nine months in prison.

Yehudi Moszkowicz says his client is being released without conditions after the defence challenged the attribution, integrity and completeness of Sky ECC data.

On 27 October, the Dutch Supreme Court rejected appeal complaints in a drugs case in which the defence sought to question three unidentified EncroChat users. The conviction stands; the prison term falls from seven years and two months to six years and ten months because the appeal proceedings took too long.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Aziz’s conviction appeal on 20 February 2026. A central issue was refusal to adjourn for further expert work on EncroChat evidence.

The Catanzaro judge rejected requests to exclude Sky ECC evidence and seek further investigations in France. The abbreviated trial continues.

The official Court calendar lists Advocate General Biondi’s Opinion in C-625/25 Prudniez for 19 November 2026. It is not yet a judgment.

On 20 October, Amsterdam District Court declared a complaint about Dutch Sky ECC connection data inadmissible because it was filed too late. Published on 26 October, the decision does not determine whether retaining and processing the data was lawful.

On 12 October the court rejected renewed challenges to Sky ECC evidence, supported by a French investigation summary about the Dutch role.

The Ostro abbreviated trial in Catanzaro ended on 9 October with 16 convictions and 34 acquittals. Cosimo Damiano Gallace and Cesare Arcorace were among those acquitted. According to ANSA, excluding SkyECC chats played a decisive role. The case concerns alleged Gallace clan influence over elections and public contracts in Badolato.

On 8 October the EU General Court rejected SY’s claim because the alleged non-material damage was not sufficiently established.

On 7 October the EU General Court rejected QO’s €10,000 claim concerning allegedly unlawful processing of Sky ECC data.

Three convicted defendants challenged statutory rules governing encrypted evidence. The court rejected their applications on 29 September and explained the decisions on 8 October.

On 22 September Limburg District Court rejected objections about interception, transparency and a fair trial.

Judgment 33327/2026 rejected an appeal against pre-trial detention. The defence challenged scrutiny and attribution of Sky ECC chats.

On 3 September the OGH rejected objections to reading French Sky ECC data in a drugs case. Sentence appeals were referred to the Vienna appellate court.

In judgment 29132/2026, published on 31 July, Italy’s Court of Cassation rejected objections concerning custody, missing hashes and French interceptions.

On 23 July Portugal’s Supreme Court considered appeals by Rúben Oliveira, known as Xuxas, and six co-defendants. It rejected their challenges to EncroChat and Sky ECC messages. Nevertheless, the appealed judgment required reconsideration because separate emails taken from seized phones could not be used as evidence.

On 23 July the National Court addressed interception, raw data and defence rights. The messages remained usable alongside other evidence.

The Hague court acquitted the defendant of murder on 23 July. It did not uphold the claim that the crypto data were unlawfully obtained.

On 20 July the High Court rejected a fair-trial objection involving EncroChat evidence. The case concerns surrender for a future criminal trial.

A Sky ECC user challenged the EU agencies over processing of his messages. The General Court dismissed his claims on 25 February 2026. An appeal against part of that ruling is pending as C-399/26 P.

The frequently cited January acquittal did not stand. It was annulled in April and followed by a new conviction judgment on 26 June.

Two men convicted in Norway argue before the European human-rights court that they could not adequately examine decrypted evidence. Their applications concern a fair trial, missing information and the origin of Sky ECC and EncroChat messages.

On 12 March 2026 the EU Court dismissed CW’s appeal as manifestly unfounded. Case C-565/25 P concerns his personal damage from alleged unlawful processing of EncroChat data.

Basel-Stadt’s Court of Appeal ruled Sky ECC data inadmissible in a drug-trafficking and money-laundering case. Its decision of 3 October 2025 was published on 24 April 2026. The official register records an appeal to Switzerland’s Federal Supreme Court.

On 14 April 2026 the French Court of Cassation declared an EncroChat appeal inadmissible. The applicant, prosecuted in Northern Ireland, had not supplied necessary documents and French translations. The ruling concerns access to this French procedure rather than the substantive lawfulness of interception.

On 14 April 2026, the Dutch Supreme Court reconsidered the implications of the European EncroChat judgment. Use of the French investigation results survived in this case. A limited sentence reduction followed for procedural delay, not unlawful interception.

The EU Court of Justice dismissed FF’s appeal on 12 March 2026 in a damages case involving Sky ECC data. The decision concerns insufficient evidence of personal harm and procedural rules.

On 23 February 2026 Albania’s Constitutional Court refused to refer Klajdi Merkaj’s complaint for a plenary hearing. Decision 58 concerns pre-trial detention, access to the case file and Sky ECC data supplied by France.

The European Court of Human Rights has communicated Askim Silgir’s complaint about EncroChat evidence to Germany and put questions to the parties. The document of 28 January 2026 records that procedural step and the issues to be examined, rather than a final judgment on his complaint or an order overturning his conviction.

On 22 December 2025 the High Court refused permission for three judicial-review claims concerning the acquisition and transfer of EncroChat data.

In Silgir v Germany (No. 2), application 22234/25, the European Court of Human Rights raises questions about EncroChat evidence, privacy and a fair trial. Murat Silgir also challenges monitoring of his lawyer correspondence. The published questions are a procedural step, not a finding that his rights were violated.

On 7 January 2025 the Cour de cassation rejected an appeal seeking annulment of Sky ECC case documents. Defence arguments included location data without separate authorisation and the scale of interception.

The Federal Constitutional Court did not admit the complaint in 2 BvR 684/22 on 1 November 2024. Published on 3 December, the decision concerns a particular conviction, not a general ban on EncroChat evidence.

The ECtHR declared two applications about French EncroChat interception and transfer to the United Kingdom inadmissible. The decision of 24 September 2024 turned in part on failure first to use an available French remedy.

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in Palmer and others v NCA on 20 September 2024. The challenge concerned the legal authority for Operation Venetic.

Two Italian united-chambers judgments from 2024 explain when French Sky ECC data may be used in Italian criminal cases. The court held that transferring existing evidence does not always require prior judicial approval. Fundamental rights and a fair trial remain limits.

On 30 April 2024 the EU Court ruled in C-670/22 on conditions for transferring and using EncroChat data. It did not invalidate all interception or all messages.

On 13 June 2023 the Dutch Supreme Court answered general questions about encrypted messages obtained abroad. Mutual trust generally applies even in joint investigation teams, while fair-trial rights and reliability remain relevant.

On 5 February 2021 the Court of Appeal admitted EncroChat evidence. The central question was whether messages were intercepted during transmission or recovered from handset storage.