# C_2016200EN.01001102.xml

| 6.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 200/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 200/11

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski Rayonen Sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 24 March 2016 — Criminal proceedings against Trayan Beshkov

(Case C-171/16)

(2016/C 200/17)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Sofiyski Rayonen Sad

Party to the main proceedings

Party to the main proceedings

Trayan Beshkov

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | How must the expression ‘new criminal proceedings’ used in Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted, and must that expression necessarily be connected with a finding of guilt in respect of an offence committed or can it also relate to proceedings in which, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed in an earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately? |
| --- | --- |

1.

How must the expression ‘new criminal proceedings’ used in Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted, and must that expression necessarily be connected with a finding of guilt in respect of an offence committed or can it also relate to proceedings in which, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed in an earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately?

| 2. | Must Article 3(1), read in conjunction with recital 13, of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as permitting national rules which provide that proceedings in which an earlier judgment delivered in another Member State must be taken into account may not be initiated by the sentenced person but only by the Member State in which the earlier judgment was delivered or by the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Must Article 3(1), read in conjunction with recital 13, of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as permitting national rules which provide that proceedings in which an earlier judgment delivered in another Member State must be taken into account may not be initiated by the sentenced person but only by the Member State in which the earlier judgment was delivered or by the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place?

| 3. | Must Article 3(3) of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as meaning that the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place may not change the manner of execution of the penalty imposed by the Member State which issued the earlier sentence, including in the event that, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed by the earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Must Article 3(3) of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings be interpreted as meaning that the Member State in which the new criminal proceedings are taking place may not change the manner of execution of the penalty imposed by the Member State which issued the earlier sentence, including in the event that, under the national law of the second Member State, the penalty imposed by the earlier judgment must absorb another sanction or be included in it or must be enforced separately?

---