mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Estonian

Selles kontekstis esitas vahistamismääruse tegemiseks pädev Belgia õigusasutus 2. juulil 2018 Madalmaade ametiasutustele raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 27 alusel taotluse lisakaristuse jaoks täiendava nõusoleku andmiseks. Kuna Madalmaade ametiasutused leidsid, et nad saavad anda nõusoleku ainult karistuse määramiseks või kriminaalmenetluse läbiviimiseks seoses muu süüteoga kui see, mille eest ta üle anti, kuid käesoleval juhul ei ole see eeldus täidetud, siis jätsid nad selle täiendava taotluse rahuldamata.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Belgia õigusasutus"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Madalmaade ametiasutused"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 27 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "Belgia õigusasutus"->"Taotluse lisakaristuse jaoks täiendava nõusoleku andmiseks 02/07/2018";
  "Taotluse lisakaristuse jaoks täiendava nõusoleku andmiseks 02/07/2018"->"Madalmaade ametiasutused";
  "Madalmaade ametiasutused"->"jätsid nad selle täiendava taotluse rahuldamata.";
  "jätsid nad selle täiendava taotluse rahuldamata."->"Belgia õigusasutus";
  "jätsid nad selle täiendava taotluse rahuldamata."->"Nad saavad anda nõusoleku ainult karistuse määramiseks või kriminaalmenetluse läbiviimiseks seoses muu süüteoga kui see, mille eest ta üle anti.."[dir=none];
  "Taotluse lisakaristuse jaoks täiendava nõusoleku andmiseks 02/07/2018"->"raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 27 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Greek

Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, στις 2 Ιουλίου 2018, η αρμόδια βελγική δικαστική αρχή έκδοσης εντάλματος απηύθυνε στις ολλανδικές αρχές πρόσθετο αίτημα συγκατάθεσης, αφορώσας την παρεπόμενη ποινή, βάσει του άρθρου 27 της απόφασης‑πλαισίου 2002/584. Εκτιμώντας ότι η συγκατάθεσή τους μπορούσε να δοθεί μόνον για καταδίκη του ενδιαφερομένου ή για δίωξή του για αξιόποινη πράξη διαφορετική από εκείνη για την οποία επιτράπηκε η παράδοσή του και ότι τούτο δεν συμβαίνει εν προκειμένω, οι ολλανδικές αρχές δεν δέχθηκαν το πρόσθετο αυτό αίτημα.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "η αρμόδια βελγική δικαστική αρχή έκδοσης"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "οι ολλανδικές αρχές"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "του άρθρου 27 της απόφασης‑πλαισίου 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "η αρμόδια βελγική δικαστική αρχή έκδοσης"->"πρόσθετο αίτημα συγκατάθεσης, αφορώσας την παρεπόμενη ποινή 02/07/2018";
  "πρόσθετο αίτημα συγκατάθεσης, αφορώσας την παρεπόμενη ποινή 02/07/2018"->"οι ολλανδικές αρχές";
  "οι ολλανδικές αρχές"->"δεν δέχθηκαν";
  "δεν δέχθηκαν"->"η αρμόδια βελγική δικαστική αρχή έκδοσης";
  "δεν δέχθηκαν"->"Εκτιμώντας ότι η συγκατάθεσή τους μπορούσε να δοθεί μόνον για καταδίκη του ενδιαφερομένου ή για δίωξή του για αξιόποινη πράξη διαφορετική από εκείνη για την οποία επιτράπηκε η παράδοσή του."[dir=none];
  "πρόσθετο αίτημα συγκατάθεσης, αφορώσας την παρεπόμενη ποινή 02/07/2018"->"του άρθρου 27 της απόφασης‑πλαισίου 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: French

C’est dans ce contexte que, le 2 juillet 2018, l’autorité judiciaire d’émission belge compétente a adressé aux autorités néerlandaises une demande de consentement additionnelle, portant sur la peine complémentaire, au titre de l’article 27 de la décision-cadre 2002/584. Estimant que leur consentement n’était susceptible d’être fourni qu’aux seules fins de permettre que la personne concernée soit condamnée ou poursuivie pour une infraction autre que celle qui a motivé l’octroi de sa remise, et que tel n’était pas le cas en l’espèce, les autorités néerlandaises n’ont pas accueilli cette demande additionnelle.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "l’autorité judiciaire d’émission belge compétente"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "les autorités néerlandaises"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "l'article 27 de la décision-cadre 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "l’autorité judiciaire d’émission belge compétente"->"une demande de consentement additionnelle, portant sur la peine complémentaire 02/07/2018";
  "une demande de consentement additionnelle, portant sur la peine complémentaire 02/07/2018"->"les autorités néerlandaises";
  "les autorités néerlandaises"->"les autorités néerlandaises n’ont pas accueilli cette demande additionnelle.";
  "les autorités néerlandaises n’ont pas accueilli cette demande additionnelle."->"l’autorité judiciaire d’émission belge compétente";
  "les autorités néerlandaises n’ont pas accueilli cette demande additionnelle."->"Leur consentement n’était susceptible d’être fourni qu’aux seules fins de permettre que la personne concernée soit condamnée ou poursuivie pour une infraction autre que celle qui a motivé l’octroi de sa remise.."[dir=none];
  "une demande de consentement additionnelle, portant sur la peine complémentaire 02/07/2018"->"l'article 27 de la décision-cadre 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Croatian

U tom je kontekstu 2. srpnja 2018. belgijsko nadležno pravosudno tijelo izdavanja uputilo nizozemskim tijelima zahtjev za dodatni pristanak koji se odnosi na dodatnu kaznu, na temelju članka 27. Okvirne odluke 2002/584. Nizozemska tijela nisu prihvatila taj dodatni zahtjev jer su smatrala da mogu dati pristanak samo u svrhu dopuštanja da se osobu o kojoj je riječ osudi ili kazneno progoni za kazneno djelo različito od onog za koje je odobrena predaja, a što nije bio slučaj u ovom predmetu.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "belgijsko nadležno pravosudno tijelo izdavanja"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Nizozemska tijela"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "članka 27. Okvirne odluke 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "belgijsko nadležno pravosudno tijelo izdavanja"->"zahtjev za dodatni pristanak koji se odnosi na dodatnu kaznu 02/07/2018";
  "zahtjev za dodatni pristanak koji se odnosi na dodatnu kaznu 02/07/2018"->"Nizozemska tijela";
  "Nizozemska tijela"->"Nizozemska tijela nisu prihvatila taj dodatni zahtjev";
  "Nizozemska tijela nisu prihvatila taj dodatni zahtjev"->"belgijsko nadležno pravosudno tijelo izdavanja";
  "Nizozemska tijela nisu prihvatila taj dodatni zahtjev"->"Njihov pristanak mogu dati samo u svrhu dopuštanja da se osobu o kojoj je riječ osudi ili kazneno progoni za kazneno djelo različito od onog za koje je odobrena predaja.."[dir=none];
  "zahtjev za dodatni pristanak koji se odnosi na dodatnu kaznu 02/07/2018"->"članka 27. Okvirne odluke 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Italian

È in tale contesto che, il 2 luglio 2018, l’autorità giudiziaria emittente belga competente ha presentato alle autorità dei Paesi Bassi una richiesta di assenso complementare riguardante la pena accessoria, ai sensi dell’articolo 27 della decisione quadro 2002/584. Ritenendo che il loro assenso potesse essere accordato unicamente al fine di consentire che l’interessato venisse condannato o sottoposto a procedimento penale per un reato diverso da quello per il quale è stata autorizzata la consegna, e che ciò non avvenisse nel caso di specie, le autorità dei Paesi Bassi non hanno accolto tale richiesta complementare.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "l’autorità giudiziaria emittente belga"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "le autorità dei Paesi Bassi"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolo 27 della decisione quadro 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "l’autorità giudiziaria emittente belga"->"una richiesta di assenso complementare riguardante la pena accessoria 02/07/2018";
  "una richiesta di assenso complementare riguardante la pena accessoria 02/07/2018"->"le autorità dei Paesi Bassi";
  "le autorità dei Paesi Bassi"->"non hanno accolto tale richiesta complementare.";
  "non hanno accolto tale richiesta complementare."->"l’autorità giudiziaria emittente belga";
  "non hanno accolto tale richiesta complementare."->"Il loro assenso potesse essere accordato unicamente al fine di consentire che l’interessato venisse condannato o sottoposto a procedimento penale per un reato diverso da quello per il quale è stata autorizzata la consegna."[dir=none];
  "una richiesta di assenso complementare riguardante la pena accessoria 02/07/2018"->"articolo 27 della decisione quadro 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Latvian

Šajā kontekstā kompetentā Beļģijas izsniegšanas tiesu iestāde 2018. gada 2. jūlijā nosūtīja Nīderlandes iestādēm papildu piekrišanas pieprasījumu attiecībā uz papildsodu atbilstoši Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 27. pantam. Nīderlandes iestādes neapmierināja šo lūgumu, jo uzskatīja, ka papildu piekrišanu var sniegt vienīgi, lai personu notiesātu vai vajātu par noziedzīgu nodarījumu, kas nav tas nodarījums, kas bijis pamatā šīs personas nodošanai, un šajā gadījumā tas tā neesot.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "kompetentā Beļģijas izsniegšanas tiesu iestāde"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Nīderlandes iestādes"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 27. pants 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "kompetentā Beļģijas izsniegšanas tiesu iestāde"->"papildu piekrišanas pieprasījumu attiecībā uz papildsodu 02/07/2018";
  "papildu piekrišanas pieprasījumu attiecībā uz papildsodu 02/07/2018"->"Nīderlandes iestādes";
  "Nīderlandes iestādes"->"neapmierināja šo lūgumu";
  "neapmierināja šo lūgumu"->"kompetentā Beļģijas izsniegšanas tiesu iestāde";
  "neapmierināja šo lūgumu"->"Papildu piekrišanu var sniegt vienīgi, lai personu notiesātu vai vajātu par noziedzīgu nodarījumu, kas nav tas nodarījums, kas bijis pamatā šīs personas nodošanai.."[dir=none];
  "papildu piekrišanas pieprasījumu attiecībā uz papildsodu 02/07/2018"->"Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 27. pants 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Lithuanian

Šiomis aplinkybėmis 2018 m. liepos 2 d. kompetentinga Belgijos išduodančioji teisminė institucija Nyderlandų institucijoms pateikė papildomą prašymą duoti sutikimą dėl papildomos bausmės pagal Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 27 straipsnį. Konstatavusios, kad sutikimą galima duoti tik siekiant nuteisti atitinkamą asmenį arba pradėti jo baudžiamąjį persekiojimą už kitą nusikalstamą veiką, o ne tą, kuria pagrįstas jo perdavimo prašymas, ir kad taip nėra šioje byloje, Nyderlandų institucijos netenkino šio papildomo prašymo.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "kompetentinga Belgijos išduodančioji teisminė institucija"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Nyderlandų institucijos"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 27 straipsnį. 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "kompetentinga Belgijos išduodančioji teisminė institucija"->"papildomą prašymą duoti sutikimą dėl papildomos bausmės 02/07/2018";
  "papildomą prašymą duoti sutikimą dėl papildomos bausmės 02/07/2018"->"Nyderlandų institucijos";
  "Nyderlandų institucijos"->"netenkino šio papildomo prašymo.";
  "netenkino šio papildomo prašymo."->"kompetentinga Belgijos išduodančioji teisminė institucija";
  "netenkino šio papildomo prašymo."->"Sutikimą galima duoti tik siekiant nuteisti atitinkamą asmenį arba pradėti jo baudžiamąjį persekiojimą už kitą nusikalstamą veiką, o ne tą, kuria pagrįstas jo perdavimo prašymas.."[dir=none];
  "papildomą prašymą duoti sutikimą dėl papildomos bausmės 02/07/2018"->"Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 27 straipsnį. 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Hungarian

E körülmények között az illetékes belga kibocsátó igazságügyi hatóság 2018. július 2‑án a 2002/584 kerethatározat 27. cikke alapján a mellékbüntetés vonatkozásában kiegészítő hozzájárulás iránti kérelmet intézett a holland hatóságokhoz. A holland hatóságok nem adtak helyt e kérelemnek, mivel álláspontjuk szerint kiegészítő hozzájárulás csak annak érdekében adható, hogy az érintett személyt az átadásának engedélyezését indokoló bűncselekménytől eltérő bűncselekmény miatt ítéljenek el vagy vonjanak büntetőeljárás alá, ami a jelen ügyben nem áll fenn.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "az illetékes belga kibocsátó igazságügyi hatóság"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "holland hatóságok"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "2002/584 kerethatározat 27. cikke 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "az illetékes belga kibocsátó igazságügyi hatóság"->"Kiegészítő hozzájárulás iránti kérelem a mellékbüntetés vonatkozásában 02/07/2018";
  "Kiegészítő hozzájárulás iránti kérelem a mellékbüntetés vonatkozásában 02/07/2018"->"holland hatóságok";
  "holland hatóságok"->"nem adtak helyt e kérelemnek";
  "nem adtak helyt e kérelemnek"->"az illetékes belga kibocsátó igazságügyi hatóság";
  "nem adtak helyt e kérelemnek"->"Kiegészítő hozzájárulás csak annak érdekében adható, hogy az érintett személyt az átadásának engedélyezését indokoló bűncselekménytől eltérő bűncselekmény miatt ítéljenek el vagy vonjanak büntetőeljárás alá.."[dir=none];
  "Kiegészítő hozzájárulás iránti kérelem a mellékbüntetés vonatkozásában 02/07/2018"->"2002/584 kerethatározat 27. cikke 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Maltese

Huwa f’dan il-kuntest li, fit-2 ta’ Lulju 2018, l-awtorità ġudizzjarja emittenti Belġjan kompetenti bagħtet lill-awtoritajiet Olandiżi talba għal kunsens addizzjonali, fir-rigward tal-piena addizzjonali, abbażi tal-Artikolu 27 tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584. Peress li qiesu li l-kunsens tagħhom seta’ jingħata biss bil-għan li l-persuna kkonċernata tkun tista’ tiġi kkundannata jew imfittxija għal reat li ma kienx dak li kien immotiva l-għoti tal-konsenja tagħha, u li dan ma kienx il-każ hawnhekk, l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi ma laqgħux din it-talba addizzjonali.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "l-awtorità ġudizzjarja emittenti Belġjan"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Artikolu 27 tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "l-awtorità ġudizzjarja emittenti Belġjan"->"talba għal kunsens addizzjonali, fir-rigward tal-piena addizzjonali 02/07/2018";
  "talba għal kunsens addizzjonali, fir-rigward tal-piena addizzjonali 02/07/2018"->"l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi";
  "l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi"->"l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi ma laqgħux din it-talba addizzjonali.";
  "l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi ma laqgħux din it-talba addizzjonali."->"l-awtorità ġudizzjarja emittenti Belġjan";
  "l-awtoritajiet Olandiżi ma laqgħux din it-talba addizzjonali."->"l-kunsens tagħhom seta’ jingħata biss bil-għan li l-persuna kkonċernata tkun tista’ tiġi kkundannata jew imfittxija għal reat li ma kienx dak li kien immotiva l-għoti tal-konsenja tagħha."[dir=none];
  "talba għal kunsens addizzjonali, fir-rigward tal-piena addizzjonali 02/07/2018"->"Artikolu 27 tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Dutch

In deze context heeft de bevoegde Belgische uitvaardigende rechterlijke autoriteit op 2 juli 2018 de Nederlandse autoriteiten uit hoofde van artikel 27 van kaderbesluit 2002/584 verzocht aanvullende toestemming te verlenen met betrekking tot de bijkomende straf. Daar de Nederlandse autoriteiten van mening waren dat hun toestemming slechts kon worden verleend voor de berechting of vervolging van de betrokkene voor enig ander feit dan datgene waarvoor een overlevering is toegestaan, en dat dit hier niet aan de orde is, hebben zij geen gevolg gegeven aan dit aanvullende verzoek.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "de bevoegde Belgische uitvaardigende rechterlijke autoriteit"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "de Nederlandse autoriteiten"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 27 van kaderbesluit 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "de bevoegde Belgische uitvaardigende rechterlijke autoriteit"->"verzocht aanvullende toestemming te verlenen met betrekking tot de bijkomende straf 02/07/2018";
  "verzocht aanvullende toestemming te verlenen met betrekking tot de bijkomende straf 02/07/2018"->"de Nederlandse autoriteiten";
  "de Nederlandse autoriteiten"->"hebben zij geen gevolg gegeven aan dit aanvullende verzoek.";
  "hebben zij geen gevolg gegeven aan dit aanvullende verzoek."->"de bevoegde Belgische uitvaardigende rechterlijke autoriteit";
  "hebben zij geen gevolg gegeven aan dit aanvullende verzoek."->"Hun toestemming slechts kon worden verleend voor de berechting of vervolging van de betrokkene voor enig ander feit dan datgene waarvoor een overlevering is toegestaan."[dir=none];
  "verzocht aanvullende toestemming te verlenen met betrekking tot de bijkomende straf 02/07/2018"->"artikel 27 van kaderbesluit 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Polish

To właśnie w tym kontekście w dniu 2 lipca 2018 r. właściwy belgijski wydający nakaz organ sądowy skierował do organów niderlandzkich na podstawie art. 27 decyzji ramowej 2002/584 wniosek o wyrażenie dodatkowej zgody dotyczącej kary dodatkowej. Organy niderlandzkie, stwierdzając, że mogą wyrazić zgodę tylko w celu umożliwienia skazania lub ścigania danej osoby za przestępstwo inne niż to, które uzasadniało jej przekazanie, a taka sytuacja w tym przypadku nie miała miejsca, nie uwzględniły tego dodatkowego wniosku.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "właściwy belgijski wydający nakaz organ sądowy"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Organy niderlandzkie"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "art. 27 decyzji ramowej 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "właściwy belgijski wydający nakaz organ sądowy"->"wniosek o wyrażenie dodatkowej zgody dotyczącej kary dodatkowej 02/07/2018";
  "wniosek o wyrażenie dodatkowej zgody dotyczącej kary dodatkowej 02/07/2018"->"Organy niderlandzkie";
  "Organy niderlandzkie"->"nie uwzględniły tego dodatkowego wniosku.";
  "nie uwzględniły tego dodatkowego wniosku."->"właściwy belgijski wydający nakaz organ sądowy";
  "nie uwzględniły tego dodatkowego wniosku."->"Mogą wyrazić zgodę tylko w celu umożliwienia skazania lub ścigania danej osoby za przestępstwo inne niż to, które uzasadniało jej przekazanie.."[dir=none];
  "wniosek o wyrażenie dodatkowej zgody dotyczącej kary dodatkowej 02/07/2018"->"art. 27 decyzji ramowej 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Portuguese

Foi neste contexto que, em 2 de julho de 2018, a autoridade judiciária de emissão competente belga dirigiu às autoridades neerlandesas um pedido de consentimento adicional, que tinha por objeto a pena acessória, nos termos do artigo 27.o da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584. Considerando que o seu consentimento só podia ser dado para permitir que a pessoa em causa fosse condenada ou julgada por uma infração diferente da que motivou a autorização da sua entrega, e que não era o que se verificava no caso concreto, as autoridades neerlandesas indeferiram esse pedido adicional.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "a autoridade judiciária de emissão competente belga"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "autoridades neerlandesas"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artigo 27.o da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "a autoridade judiciária de emissão competente belga"->"um pedido de consentimento adicional, que tinha por objeto a pena acessória 02/07/2018";
  "um pedido de consentimento adicional, que tinha por objeto a pena acessória 02/07/2018"->"autoridades neerlandesas";
  "autoridades neerlandesas"->"indeferiram esse pedido adicional.";
  "indeferiram esse pedido adicional."->"a autoridade judiciária de emissão competente belga";
  "indeferiram esse pedido adicional."->"O seu consentimento só podia ser dado para permitir que a pessoa em causa fosse condenada ou julgada por uma infração diferente da que motivou a autorização da sua entrega.."[dir=none];
  "um pedido de consentimento adicional, que tinha por objeto a pena acessória 02/07/2018"->"artigo 27.o da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Romanian

În acest context, la 2 iulie 2018, autoritatea judiciară emitentă competentă din Belgia a adresat autorităților neerlandeze o cerere pentru consimțământ suplimentar cu privire la pedeapsa complementară, în temeiul articolului 27 din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584. Considerând că consimțământul putea fi dat doar pentru a permite ca persoana vizată să fie condamnată sau urmărită penal pentru altă infracțiune decât cea care a motivat autorizarea predării și că această situație nu se regăsea în speță, autoritățile neerlandeze nu au dat curs acestei cereri adiționale.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "autoritatea judiciară emitentă competentă din Belgia"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "autoritățile neerlandeze"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolului 27 din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "autoritatea judiciară emitentă competentă din Belgia"->"o cerere pentru consimțământ suplimentar cu privire la pedeapsa complementară 02/07/2018";
  "o cerere pentru consimțământ suplimentar cu privire la pedeapsa complementară 02/07/2018"->"autoritățile neerlandeze";
  "autoritățile neerlandeze"->"nu au dat curs acestei cereri adiționale.";
  "nu au dat curs acestei cereri adiționale."->"autoritatea judiciară emitentă competentă din Belgia";
  "nu au dat curs acestei cereri adiționale."->"Consimțământul putea fi dat doar pentru a permite ca persoana vizată să fie condamnată sau urmărită penal pentru altă infracțiune decât cea care a motivat autorizarea predării.."[dir=none];
  "o cerere pentru consimțământ suplimentar cu privire la pedeapsa complementară 02/07/2018"->"articolului 27 din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Slovak

Práve v tejto súvislosti zaslal príslušný belgický vydávajúci súdny orgán 2. júla 2018 holandským orgánom žiadosť o dodatočný súhlas podľa článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584, ktorý sa týkal doplňujúceho trestu. Holandské orgány tejto dodatočnej žiadosti nevyhoveli, pretože podľa nich tento súhlas možno udeliť len na účely odsúdenia alebo trestného stíhania osoby pre iný trestný čin, než je ten, pre ktorý bola odovzdaná, pričom usúdili, že v tomto prípade to tak nebolo.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "príslušný belgický vydávajúci súdny orgán"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Holandské orgány"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "príslušný belgický vydávajúci súdny orgán"->"žiadosť o dodatočný súhlas podľa článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584, ktorý sa týkal doplňujúceho trestu. 02/07/2018";
  "žiadosť o dodatočný súhlas podľa článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584, ktorý sa týkal doplňujúceho trestu. 02/07/2018"->"Holandské orgány";
  "Holandské orgány"->"Holandské orgány tejto dodatočnej žiadosti nevyhoveli";
  "Holandské orgány tejto dodatočnej žiadosti nevyhoveli"->"príslušný belgický vydávajúci súdny orgán";
  "Holandské orgány tejto dodatočnej žiadosti nevyhoveli"->"Tento súhlas možno udeliť len na účely odsúdenia alebo trestného stíhania osoby pre iný trestný čin, než je ten, pre ktorý bola odovzdaná.."[dir=none];
  "žiadosť o dodatočný súhlas podľa článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584, ktorý sa týkal doplňujúceho trestu. 02/07/2018"->"článku 27 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Slovenian

Pristojni belgijski odreditveni pravosodni organ je v tem okviru 2. julija 2018 nizozemskim organom v skladu s členom 27 Okvirnega sklepa 2002/584 poslal zahtevo po dodatnem soglasju, ki se nanaša na dodatno kazen. Ker so nizozemski organi menili, da bi lahko soglasje dali le z namenom, da se omogoči, da se zadevna oseba obsodi ali kazensko preganja za kaznivo dejanje, ki ni tisto, za katero je bila predana, in ker to ni bilo tako v obravnavani zadevi, tej dodatni zahtevi niso ugodili.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Pristojni belgijski odreditveni pravosodni organ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "nizozemski organi"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "členom 27 Okvirnega sklepa 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "Pristojni belgijski odreditveni pravosodni organ"->"zahtevo po dodatnem soglasju, ki se nanaša na dodatno kazen 02/07/2018";
  "zahtevo po dodatnem soglasju, ki se nanaša na dodatno kazen 02/07/2018"->"nizozemski organi";
  "nizozemski organi"->"tej dodatni zahtevi niso ugodili.";
  "tej dodatni zahtevi niso ugodili."->"Pristojni belgijski odreditveni pravosodni organ";
  "tej dodatni zahtevi niso ugodili."->"Soglasje dali le z namenom, da se omogoči, da se zadevna oseba obsodi ali kazensko preganja za kaznivo dejanje, ki ni tisto, za katero je bila predana.."[dir=none];
  "zahtevo po dodatnem soglasju, ki se nanaša na dodatno kazen 02/07/2018"->"členom 27 Okvirnega sklepa 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Finnish

Tässä yhteydessä toimivaltainen belgialainen pidätysmääräyksen antanut oikeusviranomainen pyysi 2.7.2018 Alankomaiden viranomaisilta oheisseuraamusta koskevaa täydentävää suostumusta puitepäätöksen 2002/584 27 artiklan nojalla. Alankomaiden viranomaiset eivät hyväksyneet tätä täydentävää pyyntöä, koska ne katsoivat, että ne voivat antaa suostumuksensa vain siihen, että asianomainen henkilö pannaan syytteeseen tai tuomitaan muusta kuin luovuttamisen perusteena olleesta rikoksesta, mistä nyt ei ole kyse.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "toimivaltainen belgialainen pidätysmääräyksen antanut oikeusviranomainen"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Alankomaiden viranomaiset"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "puitepäätöksen 2002/584 27 artiklan 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "toimivaltainen belgialainen pidätysmääräyksen antanut oikeusviranomainen"->"Oheisseuraamusta koskevaa täydentävää suostumusta 02/07/2018";
  "Oheisseuraamusta koskevaa täydentävää suostumusta 02/07/2018"->"Alankomaiden viranomaiset";
  "Alankomaiden viranomaiset"->"eivät hyväksyneet";
  "eivät hyväksyneet"->"toimivaltainen belgialainen pidätysmääräyksen antanut oikeusviranomainen";
  "eivät hyväksyneet"->"Ne voivat antaa suostumuksensa vain siihen, että asianomainen henkilö pannaan syytteeseen tai tuomitaan muusta kuin luovuttamisen perusteena olleesta rikoksesta.."[dir=none];
  "Oheisseuraamusta koskevaa täydentävää suostumusta 02/07/2018"->"puitepäätöksen 2002/584 27 artiklan 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Swedish

Det är mot denna bakgrund som den behöriga utfärdande rättsliga myndigheten i Belgien den 2 juli 2018 sände en ytterligare begäran rörande den kompletterande påföljden till de nederländska myndigheterna, med stöd av artikel 27 i rambeslut 2002/584. De nederländska myndigheterna bedömde att de endast kunde samtycka till att den berörda personen skulle dömas eller åtalas för ett annat brott än det som motiverat överlämnandet, och att så inte var fallet här. De biföll därför inte denna ytterligare begäran.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "den behöriga utfärdande rättsliga myndigheten i Belgien"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "De nederländska myndigheterna"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 27 i rambeslut 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];

  "den behöriga utfärdande rättsliga myndigheten i Belgien"->"ytterligare begäran rörande den kompletterande påföljden 02/07/2018";
  "ytterligare begäran rörande den kompletterande påföljden 02/07/2018"->"De nederländska myndigheterna";
  "De nederländska myndigheterna"->"biföll därför inte denna ytterligare begäran.";
  "biföll därför inte denna ytterligare begäran."->"den behöriga utfärdande rättsliga myndigheten i Belgien";
  "biföll därför inte denna ytterligare begäran."->"De nederländska myndigheterna bedömde att de endast kunde samtycka till att den berörda personen skulle dömas eller åtalas för ett annat brott än det som motiverat överlämnandet.."[dir=none];
  "ytterligare begäran rörande den kompletterande påföljden 02/07/2018"->"artikel 27 i rambeslut 2002/584"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: English

In a judgment of 31 July 2018, the strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Court for the enforcement of custodial sentences, Antwerp) rejected IK’s line of argument and decided to maintain deprivation of liberty. On 3 August 2018, IK brought an appeal on a point of law against that judgment before the referring court, the Hof van Cassatie (Court of Cassation, Belgium).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Court for the enforcement of custodial sentences, Antwerp)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "The Hof van Cassatie (Court of Cassation, Belgium)"[shape=doubleoctagon];

   "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Court for the enforcement of custodial sentences, Antwerp)"->"Judgement 31/07/2018";
   "Judgement 31/07/2018"->"IK";
   "Judgement 31/07/2018"->"Decided to maintain deprivation of liberty"[dir=none];
   "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Court of Cassation, Belgium)"[label="Appeal 03/08/2018"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Bulgarian

С решение от 31 юли 2018 г. strafuitvoeringsrechtbank te Antwerpen (съд по изпълнение на наказанията Антверпен) отхвърля доводите на IK и продължава лишаването му от свобода. На 3 август 2018 г. IK подава жалба против това решение пред запитващата юрисдикция, Hof van Cassatie (Касационен съд, Белгия).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (съд по изпълнение на наказанията Антверпен)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Hof van Cassatie (Касационен съд, Белгия)"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (съд по изпълнение на наказанията Антверпен)"->"решение от 31 юли 2018 г.";
  "решение от 31 юли 2018 г."->"IK";
  "решение от 31 юли 2018 г."->"продължава лишаването му от свобода"[dir=none];
  "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Касационен съд, Белгия)"[label="3 август 2018 г. IK подава жалба"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Spanish

Mediante sentencia de 31 de julio de 2018, el strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Tribunal de Vigilancia Penitenciaria de Amberes) desestimó las alegaciones de IK y decidió mantener su privación de libertad. El 3 de agosto de 2018, IK interpuso recurso de casación contra dicha sentencia ante el tribunal remitente, el Hof van Cassatie (Tribunal de Casación, Bélgica).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Tribunal de Vigilancia Penitenciaria de Amberes)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Hof van Cassatie (Tribunal de Casación, Bélgica)"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Tribunal de Vigilancia Penitenciaria de Amberes)"->"sentencia de 31 de julio de 2018";
  "sentencia de 31 de julio de 2018"->"IK";
  "sentencia de 31 de julio de 2018"->"decidió mantener su privación de libertad."[dir=none];
  "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Tribunal de Casación, Bélgica)"[label="El 3 de agosto de 2018, IK interpuso recurso de casación"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Czech

Rozsudkem ze dne 31. července 2018 strafuitvoeringsrechtbank te Antwerpen (soud pro výkon trestů v Antverpách) odmítl argumentaci IK a rozhodl o dalším zbavení osobní svobody této osoby. Dne 3. srpna 2018 se IK proti tomuto rozsudku odvolal k předkládajícímu soudu, kterým je Hof van Cassatie (Kasační soud, Belgie).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (soud pro výkon trestů v Antverpách)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Hof van Cassatie (Kasační soud, Belgie)"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (soud pro výkon trestů v Antverpách)"->"Rozsudkem ze dne 31. července 2018";
  "Rozsudkem ze dne 31. července 2018"->"IK";
  "Rozsudkem ze dne 31. července 2018"->"rozhodl o dalším zbavení osobní svobody této osoby."[dir=none];
  "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Kasační soud, Belgie)"[label="Dne 3. srpna 2018 se IK proti tomuto rozsudku odvolal"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: Danish

Ved dom af 31. juli 2018 forkastede rechtbank te Antwerpen (retten i sager vedrørende strafafsoning i Antwerpen) IK’s argumentation og opretholdt frihedsberøvelsen. Den 3. august 2018 iværksatte IK appel til prøvelse af denne dom ved den forelæggende ret, Hof van Cassatie (kassationsdomstol, Belgien).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (retten i sager vedrørende strafafsoning i Antwerpen)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Hof van Cassatie (Hof van Cassatie (kassationsdomstol, Belgien))"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (retten i sager vedrørende strafafsoning i Antwerpen)"->"dom af 31. juli 2018";
  "dom af 31. juli 2018"->"IK";
  "dom af 31. juli 2018"->"opretholdt frihedsberøvelsen"[dir=none];
  "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Hof van Cassatie (kassationsdomstol, Belgien))"[label="Den 3. august 2018 iværksatte IK appel"];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 December 2018.
IK.
Request for a preliminary ruling from Hof van Cassatie.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States — European arrest warrant issued for the purposes of enforcing a custodial sentence — Substance and form — Article 8(1)(f) — Failure to refer to an additional sentence — Validity — Consequences — Effect on detention.
Case C-551/18 PPU. (2018)
Language: German

Mit Urteil vom 31. Juli 2018 wies die Strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Strafvollstreckungsgericht Antwerpen) das Vorbringen von IK zurück und entschied die Aufrechterhaltung seines Freiheitsentzugs. Am 3. August 2018 legte IK beim vorlegenden Gericht, dem Hof van Cassatie (Kassationshof, Belgien), Kassationsbeschwerde gegen dieses Urteil ein.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Strafvollstreckungsgericht Antwerpen))"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "IK"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Hof van Cassatie (Hof van Cassatie (Kassationshof, Belgien))"[shape=doubleoctagon];

  "The strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Strafuitvoeringsrechtbank Antwerpen (Strafvollstreckungsgericht Antwerpen))"->"Urteil vom 31. Juli 2018";
  "Urteil vom 31. Juli 2018"->"IK";
  "Urteil vom 31. Juli 2018"->"entschied die Aufrechterhaltung seines Freiheitsentzugs."[dir=none];
  "IK"->"The Hof van Cassatie (Hof van Cassatie (Kassationshof, Belgien))"[label="Am 3. August 2018 legte IK beim vorlegenden Gericht, dem Hof van Cassatie (Kassationshof, Belgien), Kassationsbeschwerde gegen dieses Urteil ein."];
    
}