# C_2021401EN.01000501.xml

| 4.10.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 401/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.10.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 401/5

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Satu Mare (Romania) lodged on 6 July 2021 — Dual Prod SRL v Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Cluj-Napoca — Comisia regională pentru autorizarea operatorilor de produse supuse accizelor armonizate

(Case C-412/21)

(2021/C 401/05)

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Tribunalul Satu Mare

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dual Prod SRL

Defendant: Direcția Generală Regională a Finanțelor Publice Cluj-Napoca — Comisia regională pentru autorizarea operatorilor de produse supuse accizelor armonizate

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 48(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which concerns the principle of the presumption of innocence, read in conjunction with Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/118/EC, (1) to be interpreted as precluding a legal situation, such as that at issue in the present case, in which an administrative measure suspending an authorisation to operate as a producer of alcohol may be adopted on the basis of mere presumptions which are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation, without any final conviction in criminal proceedings having been handed down? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 48(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which concerns the principle of the presumption of innocence, read in conjunction with Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/118/EC, (1) to be interpreted as precluding a legal situation, such as that at issue in the present case, in which an administrative measure suspending an authorisation to operate as a producer of alcohol may be adopted on the basis of mere presumptions which are the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation, without any final conviction in criminal proceedings having been handed down?

| 2. | Is Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which concerns the principle non bis in idem, read in conjunction with Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/118/EC, to be interpreted as precluding a legal situation, such as that at issue in the present case, in which two penalties of the same nature (suspension of authorisation to operate as a producer of alcohol), differing only in the duration of their effect, are imposed on the same person in respect of the same facts? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which concerns the principle non bis in idem, read in conjunction with Article 16(1) of Directive 2008/118/EC, to be interpreted as precluding a legal situation, such as that at issue in the present case, in which two penalties of the same nature (suspension of authorisation to operate as a producer of alcohol), differing only in the duration of their effect, are imposed on the same person in respect of the same facts?

---

(1)  Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC (OJ 2009 L 9, p. 12).

---