- 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-97/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Nederland (Netherlands) lodged on 12 February 2018 — Openbaar Ministerie v ET
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CN0097
62018CN0097
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
28.5.2018
Official Journal of the European Union
C 182/7
(Case C-97/18)
(2018/C 182/06)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Rechtbank Noord-Nederland, sitting in Leeuwarden
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Openbaar Ministerie
Defendant: ET
Questions referred
1.Can Article 12(1) of Framework Decision 2006/783/JHA be interpreted as meaning that, when a confiscation order transferred by an issuing State is executed in the Netherlands, a term of imprisonment pending payment as referred to in Article 577c of the Netherlands Code of Criminal Procedure may be applied, having regard to, inter alia, the decision of the Hoge Raad of 20 December 2011 to the effect that a term of imprisonment pending payment must be deemed to be a penalty within the meaning of Article 7(1) of the ECHR?
2.Does it make any difference to the possibility of applying a term of imprisonment pending payment whether the law of the issuing State also makes provision for the possibility of applying a term of imprisonment pending payment?
Council Framework Decision of 6 October 2006 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to confiscation orders (OJ 2006 L 328, p. 59).
NL:HR:2011:BP9449.