Case C‑270/17 PPU

Tadas Tupikas

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Surrender procedures between Member States — Conditions for execution — Reasons for optional non-execution — Article 4a(1) introduced by Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA — Arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a custodial sentence or a detention order — ‘Trial resulting in the decision’ — Person concerned having appeared in person at first instance — Appeal proceedings involving a re-examination of the substance of the case — Arrest warrant providing no information making it possible to check whether the rights of the defence of the person convicted were upheld during the appeal proceedings)

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 10 August 2017

1. Judicial cooperation in criminal matters—Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States—Grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant—Arrest warrant issued for the purpose of implementing a sentence handed down in absentia—‘Trial resulting in the decision’—Independent and uniform interpretation

   (Council Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, Art. 4a(1))

2. Judicial cooperation in criminal matters—Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States—Grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant—Arrest warrant issued for the purpose of implementing a sentence handed down in absentia—Possibility of executing a warrant despite the circumstances falling within the grounds for optional non-execution—Conditions—No infringement of the interested party’s rights of defence in the event of his surrender

   (Council Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, Art. 4a(1))

3. Judicial cooperation in criminal matters—Framework Decision on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States—Grounds for optional non-execution of the European arrest warrant—Arrest warrant issued to implement a sentence handed down in absentia—‘Trial resulting in the decision’—Appeal proceedings—Included—Conditions

   (Council Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, Art. 4a (1))

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 65-67)

2.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 96, 97)

3.  Where the issuing Member State has provided for a criminal procedure involving several degrees of jurisdiction which may thus give rise to successive judicial decisions, at least one of which has been handed down in absentia, the concept of ‘trial resulting in the decision’, within the meaning of Article 4a(1) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as relating only to the instance at the end of which the decision is handed down which finally rules on the guilt of the person concerned and imposes a penalty on him, such as a custodial sentence, following a re-examination, in fact and in law, of the merits of the case.

   An appeal proceeding, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in principle falls within that concept. It is nonetheless up to the referring court to satisfy itself that it has the characteristics set out above.

   (see paras 98, 99, operative part)