This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62024CB0766
Case C-766/24, Eisaggelia Protodikon Peiraia: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Protodikeio Peiraios (Trimeles Plimmeleiodikeio Peiraios) (Greece)) – Criminal proceedings against AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law or admits of no reasonable doubt – Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement – Article 54 – Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle ne bis in idem – Scope – Judgment ordering the committal of a person to a facility for offenders with mental illness – Suspension subject to that person undergoing medical treatment)
Case C-766/24, Eisaggelia Protodikon Peiraia: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Protodikeio Peiraios (Trimeles Plimmeleiodikeio Peiraios) (Greece)) – Criminal proceedings against AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law or admits of no reasonable doubt – Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement – Article 54 – Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle ne bis in idem – Scope – Judgment ordering the committal of a person to a facility for offenders with mental illness – Suspension subject to that person undergoing medical treatment)
Case C-766/24, Eisaggelia Protodikon Peiraia: Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Protodikeio Peiraios (Trimeles Plimmeleiodikeio Peiraios) (Greece)) – Criminal proceedings against AB (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law or admits of no reasonable doubt – Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement – Article 54 – Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle ne bis in idem – Scope – Judgment ordering the committal of a person to a facility for offenders with mental illness – Suspension subject to that person undergoing medical treatment)
OJ C, C/2025/1871, 7.4.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1871/oj (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
Official Journal |
EN C series |
|
C/2025/1871 |
7.4.2025 |
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 26 February 2025 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Protodikeio Peiraios (Trimeles Plimmeleiodikeio Peiraios) (Greece)) – Criminal proceedings against AB
(Case C-766/24, (1) Eisaggelia Protodikon Peiraia)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law or admits of no reasonable doubt - Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement - Article 54 - Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principle ne bis in idem - Scope - Judgment ordering the committal of a person to a facility for offenders with mental illness - Suspension subject to that person undergoing medical treatment)
(C/2025/1871)
Language of the case: Greek
Referring court
Protodikeio Peiraios (Trimeles Plimmeleiodikeio Peiraios)
Parties to the main proceedings
Prosecuting authority: Eisaggelia Protodikon Peiraia
Accused person: AB
Civil parties: CD, EF, GH, IJ, KL
Operative part of the order
Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders, signed in Schengen on 19 June 1990, which entered into force on 26 March 1995, read in the light of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as precluding a Member State from bringing criminal proceedings against a person suspected of having committed an offence, where a court of another Member State, by a judgment which has become final, has found that that person committed the same acts as those which gave rise to those proceedings, has declared that that person cannot be held criminally responsible due to a psychiatric condition and has ordered his or her committal to a facility for offenders with mental illness, in a situation in which that committal measure was conditionally suspended for a probationary period of five years and the conditions attaching thereto – namely that the person concerned must undergo medical treatment – have been complied with.
(1) Date lodged: 5.11.2024.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1871/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)