- 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-234/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof (Austria) lodged on 4 May 2017 — XC and Others
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CN0234
62017CN0234
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
24.7.2017
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 239/27
(Case C-234/17)
(2017/C 239/33)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: XC, YB, ZA
Question referred
Is EU law, in particular Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with the principles of equivalence and effectiveness inferred from it, to be interpreted as requiring the Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court, Austria), upon application by the person concerned, to review a final decision delivered by a criminal court with respect to an alleged infringement of EU law (in this case, Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 54 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement), where national law (Paragraph 363a of the Strafprozeßordnung (Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure)) provides for such a review only with respect to an alleged violation of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or one of the protocols thereto?