C 205/28
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
12.6.2023
2.
Does the principle of the primacy of EU law, with reference to Commission Decision 2006/928/EC and the third sentence of Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the principle of the retroactivity of the more lenient criminal law), preclude any re-examination, at the stage where a sentence is being enforced, in extraordinary appeal proceedings, of the limitation period for criminal liability, where the lodging of the extraordinary appeal is a consequence of a decision of the Constitutional Court, delivered after the judgment passing sentence has become final, which overturns a body of generalised and long-standing case-law of the national courts and where the dissuasiveness and effectiveness of the sentence and the certainty and stability of legal relations are thereby affected? 3.
Does the principle of the primacy of EU law, with reference to Article 53 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, permit the application of national standards of protection, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, guaranteed by the national law of the Member State and arising from the effects attributed to decisions of the Constitutional Court, where the effective application of EU law in the Member State is thereby undermined?
(1) (2)
Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union, on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests (OJ 1995 C 316, p. 49).
Commission Decision of 13 December 2006 establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption (OJ 2006 L 354, p. 56).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 6 March 2023 — Omya CZ s.r.o. v Generální ředitelství cel (Case C-133/23, Omya CZ) (2023/C 205/31) Language of the case: Czech Referring court Nejvyšší správní soud
Parties to the main proceedings Applicant: Omya CZ s.r.o.
Defendant: Generální ředitelství cel Question referred Should indent five of Article 2(4) of Council Directive 2003/96 (1) be interpreted to the effect that electricity used to power machines used in the processing of quarried limestone, in the form of multi-stage grinding and crushing down to specific grain size, both in the quarry where the quarrying takes place, and in nearby processing facilities, constitutes electricity used for mineralogical processes?
(1)
Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity (OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51).
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku (Poland) lodged on 10 March 2023 — XL v Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku (Case C-146/23, Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku) (2023/C 205/32) Language of the case: Polish Referring court Sąd Rejonowy w Białymstoku