- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-292/23, European Public Prosecutor’s Office (Judicial review of procedural acts): Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 8 April 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Central de Instrucción no 6 de Madrid – Spain) – Criminal proceedings against I.R.O., F.J.L.R. (Reference for a preliminary ruling – European Public Prosecutor’s Office – Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 – Article 42(1) – Procedural measures intended to produce legal effects vis-à-vis third parties – Judicial review, by national courts, in accordance with the requirements and procedures provided for in national law – Scope – Witness summons – National law not permitting direct judicial review of such a measure – Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU – Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0292
62023CA0292
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2025/2824
(Case C-292/23, European Public Prosecutor’s Office (Judicial review of procedural acts))
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - European Public Prosecutor’s Office - Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 - Article 42(1) - Procedural measures intended to produce legal effects vis-à-vis third parties - Judicial review, by national courts, in accordance with the requirements and procedures provided for in national law - Scope - Witness summons - National law not permitting direct judicial review of such a measure - Second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU - Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principles of equivalence and effectiveness)
(C/2025/2824)
Language of the case: Spanish
Referring court
Parties in the main proceedings
Operative part of the judgment
Article 42(1) of Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’), read in the light of the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the principles of equivalence and effectiveness,
must be interpreted as meaning that a decision by which, in the course of an investigation, the European Delegated Prosecutor handling the case concerned summons witnesses to appear is subject to review by the competent national court, pursuant to Article 42(1), where that decision is intended to produce binding legal effects capable of affecting the interests of the persons challenging that decision, such as the persons who are the subject of that investigation, by bringing about a distinct change in their legal situation.
If that is the case, national law must guarantee for those persons the effective judicial review of that decision, at least as an incidental question, where applicable, by the criminal trial court.
However, by application of the principle of equivalence, where national procedural provisions concerning similar domestic actions provide for the possibility of challenging an analogous decision directly, such a possibility must equally be afforded to those persons.
—
(1) OJ C 304, 28.8.2023.
—
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/2824/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—