CELEX: 62015CA0289
Language: en
Date: 2017-01-11 00:00:00
Title: Case C-289/15: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský súd v Prešove — Slovakia) — Criminal proceedings against Joszef Grundza (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA — Article 7 — Condition of double criminality — Article 9 — Ground for non-recognition and non-enforcement based on the lack of double criminality — National of the executing State convicted in the issuing State for failure to comply with a decision issued by a public authority)

27.2.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 63/2
            
         Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 January 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský súd v Prešove — Slovakia) — Criminal proceedings against Joszef Grundza
   (Case C-289/15) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA - Article 7 - Condition of double criminality - Article 9 - Ground for non-recognition and non-enforcement based on the lack of double criminality - National of the executing State convicted in the issuing State for failure to comply with a decision issued by a public authority))
   (2017/C 063/03)
   Language of the case: Slovak
   
      Referring court
   
   Krajský súd v Prešove
   
      Party in the main proceedings
   
   Joszef Grundza
   
      Intervening party: Krajská prokuratúra Prešov
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 7(3) and Article 9(1)(d) of Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA of 27 November 2008 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to judgments in criminal matters imposing custodial sentences or measures involving deprivation of liberty for the purpose of their enforcement in the European Union, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the condition of double criminality must be considered to be met, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, where the factual elements underlying the offence, as reflected in the judgment handed down by the competent authority of the issuing State, would also, per se, be subject to a criminal sanction in the territory of the executing State if they were present in that State.
   
      (1)  OJ C 294, 7.9.2015.