# C_2022095EN.01002001.xml

| 28.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Korkein oikeus (Finland) lodged on 20 December 2021 — C and CD

(Case C-804/21)

(2022/C 95/25)

Language of the case: Finnish

Referring court

Korkein oikeus

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: C and CD

Defendant: Syyttäjä

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 23(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, (1) read in conjunction with Article 23(5) thereof, require that, if a person in detention has not been surrendered within the time limits, the executing judicial authority referred to in Article 6(2) of the Framework Decision is to decide on a new surrender date and must determine whether a situation of force majeure exists and if the conditions required for detention are met, or is a procedure under which the court only examines those matters where the parties so request also compatible with the framework decision? If action on the part of the judicial authority is required in order for the time limit to be extended, does the lack of any such action necessarily mean that the time limits laid down in the framework decision have expired, in which case the person in detention must be released pursuant to Article 23(5) thereof? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 23(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA, (1) read in conjunction with Article 23(5) thereof, require that, if a person in detention has not been surrendered within the time limits, the executing judicial authority referred to in Article 6(2) of the Framework Decision is to decide on a new surrender date and must determine whether a situation of force majeure exists and if the conditions required for detention are met, or is a procedure under which the court only examines those matters where the parties so request also compatible with the framework decision? If action on the part of the judicial authority is required in order for the time limit to be extended, does the lack of any such action necessarily mean that the time limits laid down in the framework decision have expired, in which case the person in detention must be released pursuant to Article 23(5) thereof?

| 2. | Is Article 23(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA to be interpreted as meaning that the concept of force majeure includes legal obstacles to the surrender which are based on the national legislation of the executing Member State, such as an order preventing execution which has effect for the duration of the legal proceedings, or the right of an asylum seeker to remain in the executing Member State until his or her application for asylum has been determined? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 23(3) of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA to be interpreted as meaning that the concept of force majeure includes legal obstacles to the surrender which are based on the national legislation of the executing Member State, such as an order preventing execution which has effect for the duration of the legal proceedings, or the right of an asylum seeker to remain in the executing Member State until his or her application for asylum has been determined?

---

(1)  2002/584/JHA: Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — Statements made by certain Member States on the adoption of the Framework Decision (OJ 2002 L 190, p. 1).

---