EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-681/24: Action brought on 15 October 2024 – European Commission v Czech Republic

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0681

62024CN0681

October 15, 2024
With Google you find a lot.
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

EN

C series

C/2024/7158

9.12.2024

(Case C-681/24)

(C/2024/7158)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. Wasmeier and P. Ondrůšek, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Czech Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

find that, whereas the legislation of the Czech Republic permits the questioning of detained suspects without the presence of their lawyer in situations where the conditions of Article 3(6) of Directive 2013/48/EU (1) are not met, the Czech Republic has incorrectly transposed Article 3(6) in conjunction with Article 3(3) of that directive;

order the Czech Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Article 3(3)(b) of Directive 2013/48/EU requires that suspects or accused persons being questioned are to have the right for ‘their lawyer to be present and participate effectively when questioned’. Article 3(6) of the directive makes it possible to derogate from the right to have a lawyer present during the questioning of a detainee only ‘in exceptional circumstances’ and exclusively ‘to the extent justified in the light of the particular circumstances of the case’, that being ‘an urgent need to avert serious adverse consequences for the life, liberty or physical integrity of a person’ or where ‘immediate action … is imperative to prevent substantial jeopardy to criminal proceedings’.

The Commission is of the view that since the legislation of the Czech Republic (in particular Paragraph 76(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (2)) permits the police to question detained suspects without the presence of their lawyer where the lawyer is not accessible within a certain period, the Czech Republic has incorrectly transposed Article 3(6) of Directive 2014/48/EU in conjunction with Article 3(3) thereof.

(1) Directive 2013/48/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2013 on the right of access to a lawyer in criminal proceedings and in European arrest warrant proceedings, and on the right to have a third party informed upon deprivation of liberty and to communicate with third persons and with consular authorities while deprived of liberty (OJ 2013 L 294, p. 1).

(2) Zákon č. 141/1961 Sb., o trestním řízení soudním (trestní řád) (Law No 141/1961 on Criminal Procedure (Code of Criminal Procedure)), as amended.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/7158/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia