# C_2023338EN.01000202.xml

| 25.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 338/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 338/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 27 February 2023 — Criminal proceedings against KB

(Case C-114/23, (1) Sapira)

(2023/C 338/03)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie

Party to the main proceedings

KB

Questions referred

| 1. | Must the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the general principles of European Union law: the principles of legal certainty, inviolability of final court judgments, proportionality, and procedural autonomy, be interpreted as precluding any national legislation which prevents a court, in proceedings for enforcement of a final criminal conviction, from examining whether an enforceable judgment was given by a court which satisfies the requirements relating to establishment by law and also independence and impartiality and, if it is established that those requirements have not been satisfied, in accordance with the previous case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, from drawing the necessary consequences from that fact, inter alia disregarding the judgment thus given and discontinuing the enforcement proceedings? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the general principles of European Union law: the principles of legal certainty, inviolability of final court judgments, proportionality, and procedural autonomy, be interpreted as precluding any national legislation which prevents a court, in proceedings for enforcement of a final criminal conviction, from examining whether an enforceable judgment was given by a court which satisfies the requirements relating to establishment by law and also independence and impartiality and, if it is established that those requirements have not been satisfied, in accordance with the previous case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, from drawing the necessary consequences from that fact, inter alia disregarding the judgment thus given and discontinuing the enforcement proceedings?

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, is the carrying out of such an examination contingent on the initiative being taken by the convicted person or other authorised body or, in the light of the principles of European Union law referred to above, is the court required, in proceedings for enforcement of a final conviction, to carry out such an examination of its own motion? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative, is the carrying out of such an examination contingent on the initiative being taken by the convicted person or other authorised body or, in the light of the principles of European Union law referred to above, is the court required, in proceedings for enforcement of a final conviction, to carry out such an examination of its own motion?

---

(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings

---