- 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-393/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Apelativen sad — Plovdiv (Bulgaria) lodged on 21 May 2019 — Criminal proceedings against OM
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CN0393
62019CN0393
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 295/5
(Case C-393/19)
(2019/C 295/08)
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Party to the main proceedings
Questions referred
1.Is Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a national provision such as that pursuant to Article 242(8) of the Nakazatelen kodeks (Criminal Code, ‘the NK’) of the Republic of Bulgaria, according to which a means of transport used to commit aggravated smuggling which belongs to a third person who neither knew nor could or should have known that its employee was committing the offence must be confiscated for the benefit of the State, is unlawful on the grounds that it undermines the fair balance between the public interest and the need to protect the right to property?
2.Is Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to be interpreted as meaning that a national provision such as that pursuant to Article 242(8) of the NK, according to which a means of transport owned by a person who is not the person who committed the offence can be confiscated without the owner being guaranteed direct access to the courts to state its case, is unlawful?