# C_2020161EN.01003601.xml

| 11.5.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 161/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.5.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161/36

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal correctionnel de Bordeaux (France) lodged on 20 February 2020 — Procureur de la République v ENR Grenelle Habitat SARL, EP, FQ

(Case C-88/20)

(2020/C 161/47)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal correctionnel de Bordeaux

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Procureur de la République

Defendants: ENR Grenelle Habitat SARL, EP, FQ

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, preclude a duplication of criminal proceedings and administrative proceedings of a criminal nature whose subject matter is a single act (cold calling) prosecuted under two different classifications? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, preclude a duplication of criminal proceedings and administrative proceedings of a criminal nature whose subject matter is a single act (cold calling) prosecuted under two different classifications?

| 2. | If it does — which means a single set of proceedings for the same act — does not Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which enshrines the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, interpreted in the light of the rights and freedoms in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, require that the conditions and criteria for a single set of proceedings be defined in advance, having regard in particular to the gravity of the infringement? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If it does — which means a single set of proceedings for the same act — does not Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which enshrines the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, interpreted in the light of the rights and freedoms in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, require that the conditions and criteria for a single set of proceedings be defined in advance, having regard in particular to the gravity of the infringement?

| 3. | If it does not — which means a duplication of proceedings — does not Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which enshrines the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, interpreted in the light of the rights and freedoms in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, require that that duplication of criminal proceedings and administrative proceedings of a criminal nature for a single act (cold calling) be limited to the most serious cases and, in that case, that the criteria for determining gravity be defined in advance? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If it does not — which means a duplication of proceedings — does not Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which enshrines the principles of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties, interpreted in the light of the rights and freedoms in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights relating thereto, require that that duplication of criminal proceedings and administrative proceedings of a criminal nature for a single act (cold calling) be limited to the most serious cases and, in that case, that the criteria for determining gravity be defined in advance?

---