Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

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

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:

a)

referring only to the process leading to the finding of guilt and the imposition of the original sentence (‘the original sentence’); or

b)

referring to (a) above and/or any or all of the following:

i)

the process of any appeal following (a) and where by the original sentence is altered on appeal (‘the altered sentence’);

ii)

the process leading to the subsequent suspension of the altered sentence (or part thereof);

iii)

the process leading to the revocation of suspension of the altered sentence (or part thereof).

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).


Top