EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62022CA0242
Case C-242/22 PPU: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora — Portugal) — Criminal proceedings against TL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Directive 2010/64/EU — Right to interpretation and translation — Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) — Concept of an ‘essential document’ — Directive 2012/13/EU — Right to information in criminal proceedings — Article 3(1)(d) — Scope — Not implemented in domestic law — Direct effect — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 and Article 48(2) — European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Article 6 — Suspended prison sentence with probation — Breach of the probation conditions — Failure to translate an essential document and absence of an interpreter when that document was being drawn up — Revocation of the suspension of the prison sentence — Failure to translate the procedural acts relating to that revocation — Consequences for the validity of that revocation — Procedural defect resulting in relative nullity)
Case C-242/22 PPU: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora — Portugal) — Criminal proceedings against TL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Directive 2010/64/EU — Right to interpretation and translation — Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) — Concept of an ‘essential document’ — Directive 2012/13/EU — Right to information in criminal proceedings — Article 3(1)(d) — Scope — Not implemented in domestic law — Direct effect — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 and Article 48(2) — European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Article 6 — Suspended prison sentence with probation — Breach of the probation conditions — Failure to translate an essential document and absence of an interpreter when that document was being drawn up — Revocation of the suspension of the prison sentence — Failure to translate the procedural acts relating to that revocation — Consequences for the validity of that revocation — Procedural defect resulting in relative nullity)
Case C-242/22 PPU: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora — Portugal) — Criminal proceedings against TL (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Directive 2010/64/EU — Right to interpretation and translation — Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) — Concept of an ‘essential document’ — Directive 2012/13/EU — Right to information in criminal proceedings — Article 3(1)(d) — Scope — Not implemented in domestic law — Direct effect — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 and Article 48(2) — European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms — Article 6 — Suspended prison sentence with probation — Breach of the probation conditions — Failure to translate an essential document and absence of an interpreter when that document was being drawn up — Revocation of the suspension of the prison sentence — Failure to translate the procedural acts relating to that revocation — Consequences for the validity of that revocation — Procedural defect resulting in relative nullity)
OJ C 359, 19.9.2022, p. 11–11
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
19.9.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 359/11 |
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Évora — Portugal) — Criminal proceedings against TL
(Case C-242/22 PPU) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Urgent preliminary ruling procedure - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Directive 2010/64/EU - Right to interpretation and translation - Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) - Concept of an ‘essential document’ - Directive 2012/13/EU - Right to information in criminal proceedings - Article 3(1)(d) - Scope - Not implemented in domestic law - Direct effect - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 47 and Article 48(2) - European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - Article 6 - Suspended prison sentence with probation - Breach of the probation conditions - Failure to translate an essential document and absence of an interpreter when that document was being drawn up - Revocation of the suspension of the prison sentence - Failure to translate the procedural acts relating to that revocation - Consequences for the validity of that revocation - Procedural defect resulting in relative nullity)
(2022/C 359/13)
Language of the case: Portuguese
Referring court
Tribunal da Relação de Évora
Party in the main proceedings
TL
Intervening parties: Ministério Público
Operative part of the judgment
Article 2(1) and Article 3(1) of Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings and Article 3(1)(d) of Directive 2012/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 on the right to information in criminal proceedings, read in the light of Article 47 and Article 48(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the principle of effectiveness, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which the infringement of the rights provided for by those provisions of those directives must be invoked by the beneficiary of those rights within a prescribed period, failing which that challenge will be time-barred, where that period begins to run before the person concerned has been informed, in a language which he or she speaks or understands, first, of the existence and scope of his or her right to interpretation and translation and, secondly, of the existence and content of the essential document in question and the effects thereof.