# C_2015073EN.01001101.xml

| 2.3.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 73/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 3 December 2014 — Criminal proceedings against Atanas Ognyanov

(Case C-554/14)

(2015/C 073/17)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Sofiyski gradski sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Sentenced person: Atanas Ognyanov

Other party to the proceedings: Public prosecutor at the Sofiyska gradska prokuratura

Questions referred

| 1. | Do the provisions of Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 preclude the executing State, in the course of the transfer procedure, from reducing the duration of the sentence of deprivation of liberty imposed by the issuing State, on account of work undertaken while that sentence was being served in the issuing State, as follows:






  A) | Reduction of the sentence in application of the law of the executing State on the enforcement of the sentence in accordance with Article 17(1) [of the Framework Decision]: does that provision permit the law of the executing State on the enforcement of the sentence to be applied even at the stage of the transfer procedure in respect of matters (namely work undertaken in prison in the issuing State) which occurred while the sentenced person was under the jurisdiction of the issuing State? |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Do the provisions of Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 preclude the executing State, in the course of the transfer procedure, from reducing the duration of the sentence of deprivation of liberty imposed by the issuing State, on account of work undertaken while that sentence was being served in the issuing State, as follows:

A)

Reduction of the sentence in application of the law of the executing State on the enforcement of the sentence in accordance with Article 17(1) [of the Framework Decision]: does that provision permit the law of the executing State on the enforcement of the sentence to be applied even at the stage of the transfer procedure in respect of matters (namely work undertaken in prison in the issuing State) which occurred while the sentenced person was under the jurisdiction of the issuing State?

| B) | Reduction of the sentence as a result of a deduction made in accordance with Article 17(2) [of the Framework Decision]: does that provision permit the deduction of a period that is longer than the period of deprivation of liberty determined in accordance with the law of the issuing State, where the law of the executing State is applied and, as a result, a fresh legal assessment is made of matters which occurred in the issuing State (namely work undertaken in prison in the issuing State)? |
| --- | --- |

B)

Reduction of the sentence as a result of a deduction made in accordance with Article 17(2) [of the Framework Decision]: does that provision permit the deduction of a period that is longer than the period of deprivation of liberty determined in accordance with the law of the issuing State, where the law of the executing State is applied and, as a result, a fresh legal assessment is made of matters which occurred in the issuing State (namely work undertaken in prison in the issuing State)?

| 2. | In the event that these or other provisions of the Framework Decision are applicable to the reduction in sentence at issue, is the issuing State required to be notified if it has made a specific request to that effect, and is the transfer procedure to be discontinued if the issuing State objects? If there is a notification requirement, what should the nature of that notification be: should it be in general and abstract terms as regards the applicable law, or should it relate to the specific reduction in sentence which the court will impose on a particular sentenced person? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the event that these or other provisions of the Framework Decision are applicable to the reduction in sentence at issue, is the issuing State required to be notified if it has made a specific request to that effect, and is the transfer procedure to be discontinued if the issuing State objects? If there is a notification requirement, what should the nature of that notification be: should it be in general and abstract terms as regards the applicable law, or should it relate to the specific reduction in sentence which the court will impose on a particular sentenced person?

Supplementary question

In the event that the Court of Justice of the European Union should rule that the provisions of Article 17(1) and (2) of Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA preclude a reduction of sentence by the executing State on the basis of its domestic law (on account of work undertaken in the issuing State), is the national court’s decision nevertheless to apply its national law, owing to the fact that it is more favourable than Article 17 of Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA, compatible with EU law?

---