Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62023CB0558

Case C-558/23, Dramanova: Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 8 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit – Bulgaria) – Criminal proceedings against IC (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Manifest inadmissibility – Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law – Intellectual property – Act adversely affecting intellectual property rights – Criminal and administrative penalties – Principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties)

OJ C, C/2024/3731, 24.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3731/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)

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3731/oj

European flag

Official Journal
of the European Union

EN

C series


C/2024/3731

24.6.2024

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 8 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit – Bulgaria) – Criminal proceedings against IC

(Case C-558/23,  (1) Dramanova)  (2)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) and Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Manifest inadmissibility - Questions the answer to which may be clearly deduced from the Court’s existing case-law - Intellectual property - Act adversely affecting intellectual property rights - Criminal and administrative penalties - Principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties)

(C/2024/3731)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Rayonen sad Lukovit

Parties in the main criminal proceedings

IC

Interested party: Rayonna prokuratura Lovech, TO Lukovit

Operative part of the order

1.

The first and second questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the Rayonen sad Lukovit (District Court, Lukovit, Bulgaria), by decision of 6 September 2023, are manifestly inadmissible.

2.

Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

must be interpreting as meaning that the principle of the legality of criminal offences and penalties does not preclude national legislation which provides, where a trade mark is used in the course of trade without the consent of the holder of the exclusive right to that mark, that the same conduct may be categorised both as an administrative and as a criminal offence, without that legislation including criteria allowing a distinction to be drawn between, on the one hand, the administrative offence, and, on the other, the criminal offence, the constituent elements of the offence being described in identical terms in the criminal law and the law on trade marks.


(1)  OJ C, C/2023/644.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3731/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)


Top