This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017CN0376
Case C-376/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 22 June 2017 — The Minister for Justice and Equality Ireland and the Attorney General v Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski
Case C-376/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 22 June 2017 — The Minister for Justice and Equality Ireland and the Attorney General v Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski
Case C-376/17: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 22 June 2017 — The Minister for Justice and Equality Ireland and the Attorney General v Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski
OJ C 283, 28.8.2017, p. 25–26
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
28.8.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 283/25 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland) made on 22 June 2017 — The Minister for Justice and Equality Ireland and the Attorney General v Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski
(Case C-376/17)
(2017/C 283/35)
Language of the case: English
Referring court
Supreme Court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: The Minister for Justice and Equality, Ireland and the Attorney General
Defendant: Arkadiusz Piotr Lipinski
Questions referred
1. |
Where a person is convicted and sentenced by a court of competent jurisdiction in a member state and the original sentence imposed on him is altered on appeal and that sentence (as altered on appeal) is subsequently both suspended and reactivated following the quashing of the suspension in question, should the term ‘the trial’ as used in Article 4a of the Framework Decision (1) be interpreted as:
|
2. |
In the event that the term ‘the trial’ is to be interpreted as referring to or including the process of any appeal leading to the altered sentence, is the absence of a reference to the fact that the person whose surrender is sought was notified of and represented at, the appeal in question fatal to the validity of the European Arrest Warrant notwithstanding the fact that, as a result of additional information supplied in the course of the process in the requested state, it becomes clear as a matter of fact that the person concerned was actually notified of and represented in the appeal process. |
(1) Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ 2002, L 190, p. 1).