# C_2021289EN.01002101.xml

| 19.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 289/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 289/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Timișoara (Romania) lodged on 26 January 2021 — T.A.C. v ANI

(Case C-40/21)

(2021/C 289/29)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Timișoara

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: T.A.C.

Defendant: ANI

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the principle of the proportionality of penalties, enshrined in Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to be interpreted as also applying to facts other than those which are formally defined as criminal offences under national law, but which may be regarded as ‘criminal charges’ within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in the light of the criteria developed by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the criterion of the severity of the penalty, as in the case in the main proceedings in so far as concerns the appraisal of conflicts of interests which may result in the application of an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the principle of the proportionality of penalties, enshrined in Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to be interpreted as also applying to facts other than those which are formally defined as criminal offences under national law, but which may be regarded as ‘criminal charges’ within the meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, in the light of the criteria developed by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the criterion of the severity of the penalty, as in the case in the main proceedings in so far as concerns the appraisal of conflicts of interests which may result in the application of an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years?

| 2. | In the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative, is the principle of the proportionality of penalties, enshrined in Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national implementing law pursuant to which, in the case where a person holding an elective public office is found to have acted under a conflict of interests, an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years applies automatically, by operation of law, without there being any possibility of imposing a penalty that is proportionate to the infringement committed? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the event that the first question is answered in the affirmative, is the principle of the proportionality of penalties, enshrined in Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, to be interpreted as precluding a provision of national implementing law pursuant to which, in the case where a person holding an elective public office is found to have acted under a conflict of interests, an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years applies automatically, by operation of law, without there being any possibility of imposing a penalty that is proportionate to the infringement committed?

| 3. | Are the right to engage in work, guaranteed by Article 15(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter, to be interpreted a precluding a provision of national implementing law pursuant to which, in the case where a person holding an elective public office is found to have acted under a conflict of interests, an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years applies automatically, by operation of law, without there being any possibility of imposing a penalty that is proportionate to the infringement committed? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Are the right to engage in work, guaranteed by Article 15(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter, to be interpreted a precluding a provision of national implementing law pursuant to which, in the case where a person holding an elective public office is found to have acted under a conflict of interests, an additional penalty consisting in a prohibition on holding elective public office for a period of three years applies automatically, by operation of law, without there being any possibility of imposing a penalty that is proportionate to the infringement committed?

---