Decision-Making Power of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Klimek, Libor

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5_11

Libor Klimek²

1301 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter deals with the decision-making power of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the application of the European arrest warrant. It is divided into six sections. Section 11.1 deals with the removal of the double criminality requirement (case C-303/05—Advocaten voor de Wereld). Section 11.2 analyses the principle of ne bis in idem (cases C-261/09—Mantello and C-288/05—Kretzinger). Section 11.3 specialises on Article 4(6) of the Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA on the European arrest warrant, which provides for an optional ground for refusing to execute an EAW (cases C-66/08—Kozłowski, C-123/08—Wolzenburg, C-306/09—I. B. and case C-42/11—Lopes Da Silva Jorge). Section 11.4 is focused on the rule of speciality (cases C-388/08 PPU—Leymann & Pustovarov and C-192/12 PPU—West). Section 11.5 points out at the fundamental rights (case C-396/11—Radu). Last, but not least, Sect. 11.6 deals with the relation of the Framework Decision on the EAW to the law of extradition (case C-296/08 PPU—Goicoeche).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 84.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 109.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
Mitsilegas (2009), p. 1.
2.
Article 35(1) of the Treaty on EU as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam. Official Journal of the European Communities, C 340 of 10.11.1997; Article 35(1) of the Treaty on EU as amended by the Treaty of Nice. Official Journal of the European Union, C 321/E/5 of 29.12.2006.
3.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 16th June 2005—Case C-105/03—Criminal proceedings against Maria Pupino, para. 2.
4.
Article 35(6) of the Treaty on EU as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam. Official Journal of the European Communities, C 340 of 10.11.1997; Article 35(6) of the Treaty on EU as amended by the Treaty of Nice. Official Journal of the European Union, C 321/E/5 of 29.12.2006.
5.
Article 10(1) the Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions, annexed to the Treaty on EU and to the Treaty on the functioning of the EU. Official Journal of the European Union, C 83/322 of 30.3.2010.
6.
Reference for a preliminary ruling of 13th July 2005 from the Arbitragehof (Belgium) in the proceedings between Advocaten voor de Wereld and the Council of Ministers.
7.
Geyer (2008), p. 152.
8.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 3rd May 2007—Case C-303/05—Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW v Leden van de Ministerraad.
9.
Judgment Advocaten voor de Wereld, paras 52–54 and 60.
10.
Pollicino (2008), pp. 1318 and 1329.
11.
Judgment Advocaten voor de Wereld, para. 57.
12.
Opinion of Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer—Case C-303/05—Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW v Leden van de Ministerraad.
13.
Opinion of Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer […], para. 104.
14.
Opinion of Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer […], paras 106 and 107.
15.
Judgment Advocaten voor de Wereld, rulings.
16.
Klimek (2012b), p. 305; Klimek (2012a), pp. 131 et seq.; Klimek (2011), p. 26.
17.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 16th November 2010—Case C-261/09—Gaetano Mantello.
18.
Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14th 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. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 239/19 of 22.9.2000.
19.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart (Germany), lodged on 14th July 2009—Extradition proceedings concerning Gaetano Mantello (Case C-261/09).
20.
Judgment Mantello, para. 38.
21.
Judgment Mantello, para. 41.
22.
Judgment Mantello, paras 43–46.
23.
Judgment Mantello, para. 50.
24.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot—Case C-261/09—Criminal proceedings against Gaetano Mantello.
25.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 18th October 2007—Case C-195/06—Kommunikationsbehörde Austria (KommAustria) v Österreichischer Rundfunk (ORF), para. 24.
26.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 105–107.
27.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 100–104.
28.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 121–123.
29.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 127, 129 and 130.
30.
Judgment Mantello, rulings.
31.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 18th July 2007—Case C-288/05—Criminal proceedings against Jürgen Kretzinger.
32.
Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14th 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. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 239/19 of 22.9.2000.
33.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof by order of that court of 30th June 2005 in criminal proceedings against Jürgen Kretzinger (Case C-288/05).
34.
Judgment Kretzinger, para. 57.
35.
Judgment Kretzinger, paras 59–61.
36.
Judgment Kretzinger, paras 66 and 67.
37.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston—Case C-288/05—Staatsanwaltschaft Augsburg v Jürgen Kretzinger.
38.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], paras 85, 88 and 89.
39.
Judgment Kretzinger, paras 58 and 62.
40.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], paras 97, 99 and 100.
41.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], para. 78.
42.
Judgment Kretzinger, paras 66 and 67.
43.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 17th July 2008—Case C-66/08—Proceedings concerning the execution of a European arrest warrant issued against Szymon Kozłowski.
44.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberlandesgericht Stuttgart (Germany) lodged on 18th February 2008—Extradition proceedings against Szymon Kozłowski (Case C-66/08).
45.
Judgment Kozłowski, paras 33 and 34.
46.
Judgment Kozłowski, paras 36–39.
47.
Judgment Kozłowski, para. 44.
48.
Judgment Kozłowski, paras 46–48.
49.
Judgment Kozłowski, paras 50 and 51.
50.
View of Advocate General Bot—Case C-66/08—Criminal Proceedings against Szymon Kozłowski.
51.
View of Advocate General Bot […], paras 129 and 137.
52.
View of Advocate General Bot […], paras 138 and 139.
53.
View of Advocate General Bot […], paras 150–155.
54.
Judgment Kozłowski, rulings.
55.
Fichera (2009), p. 248.
56.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 6th October 2009—Case C-123/08—Dominic Wolzenburg.
57.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Amsterdam lodged on 21st March 2008—Dominic Wolzenburg (Case C-123/08).
58.
Janssens (2010), p. 841.
59.
Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29th April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC. Official Journal of the European Union, L 158/77 of 30.4.2004. The Directive lays down the conditions governing the exercise of the right of free movement and residence within the territory of the Member States by EU citizens and their family members, the right of permanent residence in the territory of the Member States for EU citizens and their family members, the limits placed on the rights set out in and on grounds of public policy, public security or public health [Article 1 of the Directive (at the time of the preliminary ruling)].
60.
Article 16(1) of the Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the EU and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (at the time of the preliminary ruling).
61.
Judgment Wolzenburg, paras 49–52.
62.
Opinion of Advocate General Yves Bot—Case C-123/08—Execution of a European arrest warrant issued against Dominic Wolzenburg.
63.
Opinion of Advocate General Yves Bot […], paras 75–78.
64.
Opinion of Advocate General Yves Bot […], paras 82–85.
65.
Judgment Wolzenburg, paras 49–52.
66.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21st October 2010—Case C-306/09—I. B.
67.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour constitutionnelle (Belgium) lodged on 31st July 2009—I. B. v Conseil des ministres (Case C-306/09).
68.
Judgment I. B., para. 50.
69.
Judgment I. B., paras 51 and 52.
70.
Judgment I. B., paras 56 and 57.
71.
Judgment I. B., paras 62 and 63.
72.
Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón—Case C-306/09—I. B. v Conseil des ministres.
73.
Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón […], paras 36 and 41.
74.
Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón […], para. 51.
75.
Opinion of Advocate General Cruz Villalón […], para. 52.
76.
Judgment I. B., rulings.
77.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 5th September 2012—Case C-42/11—João Pedro Lopes Da Silva Jorge.
78.
Code de procédure pénale.
79.
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Council of Europe, European Treaty Series No. 005 [1950]. Rome, 4th November 1950.
80.
Treaty on the functioning of the European Union as amended by the Treaty of Lisbon. Official Journal of the European Union, C 83/47 of 30.3.2010.
81.
Under Article 18 of the Treaty on the functioning of the EU, any discrimination on grounds of nationality shall be prohibited.
82.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour D’Appel D’Amiens (France) lodged on 31st January 2011—Criminal proceedings against João Pedro Lopes Da Silva Jorge (Case C-42/11).
83.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, paras 35 and 37.
84.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, paras 39 and 40.
85.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, paras 49 and 50.
86.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, para. 52.
87.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi—Case C-42/11—Joao Pedro Lopes Da Silva Jorge.
88.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], para. 48.
89.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], paras 50, 52 and 53.
90.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], para. 59.
91.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], paras 30 and 34.
92.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], para. 39.
93.
Opinion of Advocate General Mengozzi […], para. 44 and 46.
94.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, paras 44 and 45.
95.
Judgment Lopes Da Silva Jorge, rulings.
96.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 1st December 2008—Case C-388/08 PPU—Criminal proceedings against Artur Leymann and Aleksei Pustovarov.
97.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland) lodged on 5th September 2008—Criminal proceedings against Artur Leymann, Aleksei Pustovarov (Case C-388/08).
98.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, para. 44.
99.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, para. 57.
100.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, paras 61 and 62.
101.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, paras 65 and 71.
102.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, paras 72, 73 and 75.
103.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, para. 53.
104.
Judgment Leymann & Pustovarov, rulings.
105.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 28th June 2012—Case C-192/12 PPU—Melvin West.
106.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland) lodged on 24th April 2012—Melvin West v Virallinen syyttäjä (Case C-192/12).
107.
Judgment West, para. 38.
108.
Judgment West, paras 51 and 52.
109.
Judgment West, paras 56 and 60.
110.
Judgment West, paras 62 and 79.
111.
Judgment West, paras 46 and 48.
112.
Judgment West, para. 47.
113.
Judgment West, paras 46 and 48.
114.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 30th May 2013—Case C-168/13 PPU—Jeremy F v Premier ministre.
115.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil Constitutionnel (France) lodged on 4th April 2013—Jeremy F. v Premier ministre (Case C-168/13 PPU).
116.
Judgment Jeremy F, paras 37, 38 and 39.
117.
Judgment Jeremy F, paras 51, 52 and 53.
118.
Judgment Jeremy F, paras 65 and 66.
119.
Judgment Jeremy F, paras 69 and 70.
120.
Judgment Jeremy F, para. 74.
121.
Judgment Jeremy F, rulings.
122.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 29th January 2013—Case C-396/11—Ciprian Vasile Radu.
123.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Constanța (Romania) lodged on 27th July 2011—Criminal proceedings against Ciprian Vasile Radu.
124.
Judgment Radu, paras 40 and 41.
125.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston—Case C-396/11—Ministerul Public—Parchetul de pe lângă Curtea de Apel Constanţa v Ciprian Vasile Radu.
126.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], para. 62.
127.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], paras 70 and 73.
128.
Opinion of Advocate General Sharpston […], para. 104.
129.
Judgment Radu, rulings.
130.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 26th February 2013—Case C-399/11—Stefano Melloni v Ministerio Fiscal.
131.
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Union, C 83/389 of 30.3.2010.
132.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Constitutional, Madrid (Spain) lodged on 28th July 2011—Criminal proceedings against Stefano Melloni—other party: Ministerio Fiscal (Case C-399/11).
133.
Judgment Melloni, paras 41 and 46.
134.
Judgment Melloni, para. 47.
135.
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Council of Europe, European Treaty Series No. 005 [1950]. Rome, 4th November 1950.
136.
Judgment Melloni, para. 49 and 50.
137.
Judgment Melloni, paras 51, 52 and 53.
138.
Judgment Melloni, para. 60.
139.
Judgment Melloni, paras 62 and 63.
140.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot—Case C-399/11—Criminal proceedings against Stefano Melloni.
141.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 59 and 60.
142.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 62 and 64.
143.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], para. 67.
144.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 69 and 70.
145.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], para. 74.
146.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 83 and 84.
147.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], para. 100.
148.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 119 and 122.
149.
Opinion of Advocate General Bot […], paras 132 and 134.
150.
Judgment Melloni, rulings.
151.
Statements made by certain Member States on the adoption of the Framework Decision [2002/584/JHA of 13th June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States]. Official Journal of the European Communities, L 190/19 of 18.7.2002.
152.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 12th August 2008—Case C-296/08 PPU—Extradition proceedings against Ignacio Pedro Santesteban Goicoechea.
153.
Convention drawn up on the Basis of Art. K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, relating to extradition between the Member States of the European Union. Official Journal of the European Communities, C 313/12 of 23.10.1996.
154.
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour d’appel de Montpellier (France) lodged on 3rd July 2008—Ministère public v Ignacio Pédro Santesteban Goicoechea (Case C-296/08).
155.
Judgment Goicoechea, paras 53 and 57–59.
156.
Judgment Goicoechea, paras 60–62.
157.
Judgment Goicoechea, paras 73–77.
158.
Judgment Goicoechea, paras 79 and 80.
159.
View of Advocate General Kokott—Case C-296/08 PPU—Ignacio Pedro Santesteban Goicoechea.
160.
View of Advocate General Kokott […], paras 20–23.
161.
View of Advocate General Kokott […], paras 24 and 25.
162.
Judgment Goicoechea, para. 66.
163.
View of Advocate General Kokott […], paras 28–30.
164.
View of Advocate General Kokott […], paras 31 and 32.
165.
Judgment Goicoechea, rulings.
166.
Judgment Goicoechea, rulings.

References

Fichera M (2009) Case C-66/08, proceedings concerning Szymon Kozłowski, Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 17 July 2008, nyr. Common Mark Law Rev 46:241–254
Google Scholar
Geyer F (2008) European Arrest Warrant: Court of Justice of the European Communities: Judgment of 3 May 2007, Case C-303/05, Advocaten voor de Wereld VZW v. Leden van de Ministerraad (Case Note). Eur Const Law Rev 4:149–161
Google Scholar
Janssens C (2010) Case C-123/08, Dominic Wolzenburg, Judgment of the Court of Justice (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2009, not yet reported. Common Mark Law Rev 47:831–845
Google Scholar
Klimek L (2011) Transnational Application of the Ne bis in idem Principle in Europe. Notitiae ex Academia Bratislavensi Iurisprudentiae 5:12–33
Google Scholar
Klimek L (2012a) Dôvody pre nevykonanie európskeho zatýkacieho rozkazu [transl.: Grounds for non-execution the European Arrest Warrant]. Justičná revue 64:127–144
Google Scholar
Klimek L (2012b) Ne bis in idem v konaní o európskom zatýkacom rozkaze [transl.: Ne bis is idem principle in the European Arrest Warrant Procedure]. Justičná revue 64:304–312
Google Scholar
Mitsilegas V (2009) EU criminal law. Hart, Oxford
Google Scholar
Pollicino O (2008) European Arrest Warrant and constitutional principles of the Member States: a case law-based outline in the attempt to strike the right balance between interacting legal systems. German Law J 9:1313–1354
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Faculty of Law, Pan-European University, Bratislava, Slovak Republic
Libor Klimek

Authors

Libor Klimek
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Klimek, L. (2015). Decision-Making Power of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In: European Arrest Warrant. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5_11

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07338-5_11
Published: 26 June 2014
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07337-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07338-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics