- 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-60/12: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 14 November 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrchní soud v Praze — Czech Republic) — Proceedings concerning the enforcement of a financial penalty issued against Marián Baláž (Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA — Application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties — ‘Court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters’ — The ‘Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat’ under Austrian law — Nature and scope of the review on the part of the court of the Member State of enforcement)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CA0060
62012CA0060
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
11.1.2014
Official Journal of the European Union
C 9/5
(Case C-60/12)(Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA - Application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties - ‘Court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters’ - The ‘Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat’ under Austrian law - Nature and scope of the review on the part of the court of the Member State of enforcement)
2014/C 9/07
Language of the case: Czech
Referring court
Party to the main proceedings
Re:
Request for a preliminary ruling — Vrchní soud v Praze — Interpretation of Article 1(a)(iii) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties (OJ 2005 L 76, p. 16) — ‘Court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters’ — ‘Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat’ under Austrian law — Concept of ‘opportunity to have the case tried’ before a court within the meaning of Article 1(a)(iii) of the Framework Decision — Scope
Operative part of the judgment
1.The term ‘court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters’, set out in Article 1(a)(iii) of Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, is an autonomous concept of Union law and must be interpreted as covering any court or tribunal which applies a procedure that satisfies the essential characteristics of criminal procedure. The Unabhängiger Verwaltungssenat in den Ländern (Austria) fulfils those criteria and must for that reason be regarded as coming within the scope of that term.
2.Article 1(a)(iii) of Framework Decision 2005/214, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, must be interpreted as meaning that a person is to be regarded as having had the opportunity to have a case tried before a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters in the situation where, prior to bringing his appeal, that person was required to comply with a pre-litigation administrative procedure. Such a court must have full jurisdiction to examine the case as regards both the legal assessment and the factual circumstances.
Language of the case: Czech
(1) OJ C 109, 14.4.2012.