Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62020CN0206

    Case C-206/20: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom) made on 15 May 2020 — VA v Prosecutor of the regional prosecutor’s office in Ruse, Bulgaria

    IO C 262, 10.8.2020, p. 14–15 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Date of document:
    15/05/2020
    Date lodged:
    15/05/2020
    Author:
    An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
    Form:
    Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
    Authentic language:
    Béarla
    Type of procedure:
    Tarchur le haghaidh réamhrialú
    Link
    Select all documents mentioning this document
    Instruments cited in case law:
    Link

    10.8.2020   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 262/14

    Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) (United Kingdom) made on 15 May 2020 — VA v Prosecutor of the regional prosecutor’s office in Ruse, Bulgaria

    (Case C-206/20)

    (2020/C 262/18)

    Language of the case: English

    Referring court

    High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant: VA

    Respondent: Prosecutor of the regional prosecutor’s office in Ruse, Bulgaria

    Question referred

    Where surrender is sought in order to prosecute a requested person, and where the decision to issue an underlying national arrest warrant (‘NAW’) and the decision to issue a European arrest warrant (‘EAW’) are both taken by a public prosecutor, without any involvement of a Court prior to surrender, does a requested person receive the dual level of protection envisaged by the Court in Bob-Dogi C-241/15, (ECLI:EU:C:2016:385) if:

    a)

    the effect of the NAW is limited to detaining the individual for a maximum of 72 hours for the purpose of bringing him before a Court; and

    b)

    on surrender, it is solely a matter for the Court whether to order release, or to continue detention, in light of all the circumstances of the case?
    Top