This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CA0365
Case C-365/21, Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg (Reservation in relation to the principle ne bis in idem): Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against MR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 54 — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 55(1)(b) — Exception to the application of the principle ne bis in idem — Offence against the security or other essential interests of the Member State — Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 52(1) — Limitations to the principle ne bis in idem — Compatibility of a national declaration providing for an exception to the principle ne bis in idem — Criminal organisation — Financial crime)
Case C-365/21, Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg (Reservation in relation to the principle ne bis in idem): Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against MR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 54 — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 55(1)(b) — Exception to the application of the principle ne bis in idem — Offence against the security or other essential interests of the Member State — Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 52(1) — Limitations to the principle ne bis in idem — Compatibility of a national declaration providing for an exception to the principle ne bis in idem — Criminal organisation — Financial crime)
Case C-365/21, Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg (Reservation in relation to the principle ne bis in idem): Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against MR (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement — Article 54 — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 55(1)(b) — Exception to the application of the principle ne bis in idem — Offence against the security or other essential interests of the Member State — Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Principle ne bis in idem — Article 52(1) — Limitations to the principle ne bis in idem — Compatibility of a national declaration providing for an exception to the principle ne bis in idem — Criminal organisation — Financial crime)
OJ C 173, 15.5.2023, p. 3–4
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
15.5.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 173/3 |
Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 March 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Bamberg — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against MR
(Case C-365/21, (1) Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg (Reservation in relation to the principle ne bis in idem))
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement - Article 54 - Principle ne bis in idem - Article 55(1)(b) - Exception to the application of the principle ne bis in idem - Offence against the security or other essential interests of the Member State - Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Principle ne bis in idem - Article 52(1) - Limitations to the principle ne bis in idem - Compatibility of a national declaration providing for an exception to the principle ne bis in idem - Criminal organisation - Financial crime)
(2023/C 173/04)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Oberlandesgericht Bamberg
Criminal proceedings against
MR
joined party: Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bamberg
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Consideration of the first question has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Article 55(1)(b) 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, in the light of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. |
|
2. |
Article 55(1)(b) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, read in conjunction with Article 50 and Article 52(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding the courts of a Member State from interpreting the declaration made by that Member State under Article 55(1) of that convention as meaning that, so far as concerns the offence of forming a criminal organisation, that Member State is not bound by the provisions of Article 54 of that convention where the criminal organisation in which the person prosecuted participated has engaged exclusively in financial crime, in so far as the prosecution of that person is, in the light of the actions of that organisation, intended to punish harm to the security or other equally essential interests of that Member State. |