mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2019.
Criminal proceedings against Oriol Junqueras Vies.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Expedited procedure — Institutional law — Citizen of the European Union elected to the European Parliament while being held in provisional detention in the context of criminal proceedings — Article 14 TEU — Concept of ‘Member of the European Parliament’ — Article 343 TFEU — Immunities necessary for the performance of the tasks of the European Union — Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Article 9 — Immunities enjoyed by Members of the European Parliament — Immunity as regards travel — Immunities as regards sessions — Personal, temporal and material scope of the various immunities — Waiver of immunity by the European Parliament — Request to waive immunity from a national court — Act concerning the election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage — Article 5 — Term of office — Article 8 — Electoral procedure — Article 12 — Verification of the credentials of Members of the European Parliament following the official declaration of the election results — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 39(2) — Election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot — Right to stand as a candidate at elections.
Case C-502/19. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

Predsednik Evropskega parlamenta je 2. julija 2019 otvoril prvo zasedanje v parlamentarnem obdobju, ki je sledilo volitvam v Evropski parlament, ki so potekale 26. maja 2019.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunal Supremo (Vrhovno sodišče)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Člen 9 Protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah Evropske unije"[shape=trapezium];

    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"->"Izpodbijanje odredbe";
  "Izpodbijanje odredbe"->"Tribunal Supremo (Vrhovno sodišče)";
  "Izpodbijanje odredbe"->"Člen 9 Protokola o privilegijih in imunitetah Evropske unije"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2019.
Criminal proceedings against Oriol Junqueras Vies.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Expedited procedure — Institutional law — Citizen of the European Union elected to the European Parliament while being held in provisional detention in the context of criminal proceedings — Article 14 TEU — Concept of ‘Member of the European Parliament’ — Article 343 TFEU — Immunities necessary for the performance of the tasks of the European Union — Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Article 9 — Immunities enjoyed by Members of the European Parliament — Immunity as regards travel — Immunities as regards sessions — Personal, temporal and material scope of the various immunities — Waiver of immunity by the European Parliament — Request to waive immunity from a national court — Act concerning the election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage — Article 5 — Term of office — Article 8 — Electoral procedure — Article 12 — Verification of the credentials of Members of the European Parliament following the official declaration of the election results — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 39(2) — Election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot — Right to stand as a candidate at elections.
Case C-502/19. (2019)
Language: Finnish

Euroopan parlamentin puhemies julisti 2.7.2019 alkaneeksi Euroopan parlamentin 26.5.2019 toimitettuihin vaaleihin perustuvan vaalikauden ensimmäisen istunnon.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunal Supremo (Korkein oikeus)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Euroopan unionin erioikeuksista ja vapauksista tehdyn pöytäkirjan 9 artikla."[shape=trapezium];

    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"->"Määräyksen riitauttaminen";
  "Määräyksen riitauttaminen"->"Tribunal Supremo (Korkein oikeus)";
  "Määräyksen riitauttaminen"->"Euroopan unionin erioikeuksista ja vapauksista tehdyn pöytäkirjan 9 artikla."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2019.
Criminal proceedings against Oriol Junqueras Vies.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Expedited procedure — Institutional law — Citizen of the European Union elected to the European Parliament while being held in provisional detention in the context of criminal proceedings — Article 14 TEU — Concept of ‘Member of the European Parliament’ — Article 343 TFEU — Immunities necessary for the performance of the tasks of the European Union — Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Article 9 — Immunities enjoyed by Members of the European Parliament — Immunity as regards travel — Immunities as regards sessions — Personal, temporal and material scope of the various immunities — Waiver of immunity by the European Parliament — Request to waive immunity from a national court — Act concerning the election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage — Article 5 — Term of office — Article 8 — Electoral procedure — Article 12 — Verification of the credentials of Members of the European Parliament following the official declaration of the election results — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 39(2) — Election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot — Right to stand as a candidate at elections.
Case C-502/19. (2019)
Language: Swedish

Den 2 juli 2019 öppnade Europaparlamentets ordförande den första sessionen för den mandatperiod som följde av det val till Europaparlamentet som hade anordnats den 26 maj 2019.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Tribunal Supremo (Högsta domstolen)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Artikel 9 i protokollet om Europeiska unionens immunitet och privilegier"[shape=trapezium];

    
  "Mr Junqueras Vies"->"Bestrida beslutet";
  "Bestrida beslutet"->"Tribunal Supremo (Högsta domstolen)";
  "Bestrida beslutet"->"Artikel 9 i protokollet om Europeiska unionens immunitet och privilegier"[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 19 December 2019.
Criminal proceedings against Oriol Junqueras Vies.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Expedited procedure — Institutional law — Citizen of the European Union elected to the European Parliament while being held in provisional detention in the context of criminal proceedings — Article 14 TEU — Concept of ‘Member of the European Parliament’ — Article 343 TFEU — Immunities necessary for the performance of the tasks of the European Union — Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union — Article 9 — Immunities enjoyed by Members of the European Parliament — Immunity as regards travel — Immunities as regards sessions — Personal, temporal and material scope of the various immunities — Waiver of immunity by the European Parliament — Request to waive immunity from a national court — Act concerning the election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage — Article 5 — Term of office — Article 8 — Electoral procedure — Article 12 — Verification of the credentials of Members of the European Parliament following the official declaration of the election results — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 39(2) — Election of Members of the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage in a free and secret ballot — Right to stand as a candidate at elections.
Case C-502/19. (2019)
Language: English

Mr Junqueras Vies brought an action before the Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court) challenging the order referred to in paragraph 25 above, in which he invoked the immunities provided for in Article 9 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union.
In response to a request for observations in that request, the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Counsel for the State and the VOX political party submitted that Mr Junqueras Vies was not protected by the immunities in question.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "Mr Junqueras Vies"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Article 9 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union"[shape=trapezium];
   "Public Prosecutor’s Office"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Counsel for the State"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "VOX political party"[shape=doubleoctagon];

    
   "Mr Junqueras Vies"->"Challenging the order";
   "Challenging the order"->"Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court)";
   "Challenging the order"->"Article 9 of the Protocol on the privileges and immunities of the European Union"[dir=none];
   "Public Prosecutor’s Office"->"Challenging the order"[label="Mr Junqueras Vies was not protected by the immunities in question."];
   "Counsel for the State"->"Challenging the order"[label="Mr Junqueras Vies was not protected by the immunities in question."];
   "VOX political party"->"Challenging the order"[label="Mr Junqueras Vies was not protected by the immunities in question."];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: English

The Public Prosecutor’s Office, Vienna, brought criminal proceedings against NJ in respect of four acts, which the referring court classifies, in particular, as theft committed in a professional capacity, punishable in the issuing Member State, according to the referring court, by a custodial sentence of ‘a maximum of at least 3 years’ within the meaning of Article 2(2) of Framework Decision 2002/584. That court considers that other acts of which NJ is accused, such as coercion, are punishable in the issuing and requested Member States by a maximum custodial sentence of at least 12 months.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "The Public Prosecutor’s Office, Vienna"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Article 2(2) of Framework Decision 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
   "The Public Prosecutor’s Office, Vienna"->"Brought criminal proceedings.";
   "Brought criminal proceedings"->"NJ";
   "Brought criminal proceedings"->"Theft committed in a professional capacity."[dir=none];
   "Theft committed in a professional capacity."->"Article 2(2) of Framework Decision 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Bulgarian

Прокуратурата във Виена започва наказателно преследване срещу NJ за четири деяния, квалифицирани от запитващата юрисдикция по-специално като кражба, която е извършена по специален начин и за която според запитващата юрисдикция в държавата членка, издала европейската заповед за арест, е предвидено наказание лишаване от свобода „за срок не по-малък от три години“ по смисъла на член 2, параграф 2 от Рамково решение 2002/584. Тази юрисдикция счита, че за други деяния, за които е разследван NJ, например упражняване на принуда, в държавата членка, издала европейската заповед за арест, както и в държавата членка, до която е отправена тази заповед за арест, е предвидено наказание лишаване от свобода за срок, не по-малък от дванадесет месеца.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Прокуратурата във Виена"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "член 2, параграф 2 от Рамково решение 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Прокуратурата във Виена"->"започва наказателно преследване.";
  "започва наказателно преследване"->"NJ";
  "започва наказателно преследване"->"кражба, която е извършена по специален начин."[dir=none];
  "кражба, която е извършена по специален начин."->"член 2, параграф 2 от Рамково решение 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Spanish

La Fiscalía de Viena inició acciones penales contra NJ a causa de cuatro hechos calificados por el tribunal remitente de delito continuado de robo, sancionado en el Estado miembro emisor, según dicho tribunal, con una pena «de un máximo de al menos tres años», como se exige en el artículo 2, apartado 2, de la Decisión Marco 2002/584. El tribunal remitente considera que otros hechos imputados a NJ, como las coacciones, se sancionan en el Estado miembro emisor y en el Estado miembro requerido con una pena cuya duración máxima es al menos de doce meses.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "La Fiscalía de Viena"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artículo 2, apartado 2, de la Decisión Marco 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "La Fiscalía de Viena"->"inició acciones penales.";
  "inició acciones penales"->"NJ";
  "inició acciones penales"->"Robo cometido a título profesional."[dir=none];
  "Robo cometido a título profesional."->"artículo 2, apartado 2, de la Decisión Marco 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Czech

Státní zastupitelství ve Vídni zahájilo trestní stíhání proti NJ z důvodu čtyř skutků, které předkládající soud kvalifikuje mimo jiné jako krádež spáchanou při výkonu povolání, za kterou lze ve vystavujícím členském státě uložit podle předkládajícího soudu trest „s horní hranicí sazby v délce nejméně tři roky“ ve smyslu čl. 2 odst. 2 rámcového rozhodnutí 2002/584. Předkládající soud má za to, že za další skutky vytýkané NJ, jako je nátlak, lze ve vystavujícím členském státě, jakož i v dožádaném členském státě uložit trest s horní hranicí sazby v délce nejméně dvanáct měsíců.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Státní zastupitelství ve Vídni"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "čl. 2 odst. 2 rámcového rozhodnutí 2002/584."[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Státní zastupitelství ve Vídni"->"zahájilo trestní stíhání.";
  "zahájilo trestní stíhání"->"NJ";
  "zahájilo trestní stíhání"->"krádež spáchanou při výkonu povolání."[dir=none];
  "krádež spáchanou při výkonu povolání."->"čl. 2 odst. 2 rámcového rozhodnutí 2002/584."[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Danish

Anklagemyndigheden i Wien har indledt strafforfølgning mod NJ som følge af fire forhold, der af den forelæggende ret bl.a. er kvalificeret som kommercielt tyveri, og som ifølge den forelæggende ret i den udstedende medlemsstat kan medføre en straf »af en maksimal varighed på mindst tre år« som omhandlet i artikel 2, stk. 2, i rammeafgørelse 2002/584. Den nævnte ret er af den opfattelse, at de forhold, der tilskrives NJ, såsom tvang, kan straffes med en straf af en maksimal varighed på mindst 12 måneder i såvel den udstedende medlemsstat som i den medlemsstat, som anmodningen rettes til.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Anklagemyndigheden i Wien"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 2, stk. 2, i rammeafgørelse 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Anklagemyndigheden i Wien"->"har indledt strafforfølgning.";
  "har indledt strafforfølgning"->"NJ";
  "har indledt strafforfølgning"->"kommercielt tyveri."[dir=none];
  "kommercielt tyveri."->"artikel 2, stk. 2, i rammeafgørelse 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: German

Die Staatsanwaltschaft Wien betreibt die Strafverfolgung von NJ wegen vier Taten, die vom vorlegenden Gericht u. a. als gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl eingestuft werden und nach seinen Angaben im Ausstellungsmitgliedstaat mit einer Strafe „im Höchstmaß von mindestens drei Jahren“ im Sinne von Art. 2 Abs. 2 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/584 bedroht sind. Andere NJ zur Last gelegte Taten wie Nötigung seien im Ausstellungsmitgliedstaat und im ersuchten Mitgliedstaat mit einer Strafe im Höchstmaß von mindestens zwölf Monaten bedroht.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Die Staatsanwaltschaft Wien"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Art. 2 Abs. 2 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Die Staatsanwaltschaft Wien"->"betreibt die Strafverfolgung.";
  "betreibt die Strafverfolgung"->"NJ";
  "betreibt die Strafverfolgung"->"gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl."[dir=none];
  "gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl."->"Art. 2 Abs. 2 des Rahmenbeschlusses 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Estonian

Viini prokuratuur algatas NJ-i suhtes kriminaalmenetluse seoses nelja teoga, mille eelotsusetaotluse esitanud kohus on muu hulgas kvalifitseerinud professionaalseks varguseks, mis on vahistamismääruse teinud liikmesriigis karistatav vabadusekaotusega, „mille maksimaalne pikkus on vähemalt kolm aastat“ raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 2 lõike 2 tähenduses. Nimetatud kohus märgib, et muud NJ-le ette heidetud teod, nagu sundimine, on vahistamismääruse teinud liikmesriigis ja vahistamismääruse saanud liikmesriigis karistatavad vabadusekaotusega, mille maksimaalne pikkus on vähemalt 12 kuud.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Viini prokuratuur"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 2 lõike 2"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Viini prokuratuur"->"algatas kriminaalmenetluse.";
  "algatas kriminaalmenetluse"->"NJ";
  "algatas kriminaalmenetluse"->"professionaalseks varguseks."[dir=none];
  "professionaalseks varguseks."->"raamotsuse 2002/584 artikli 2 lõike 2"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Greek

Η Εισαγγελία της Βιέννης άσκησε ποινική δίωξη κατά του NJ για τέσσερις πράξεις, οι οποίες, κατά το αιτούν δικαστήριο, συνιστούν, μεταξύ άλλων, κλοπή κατ’ επάγγελμα τελεσθείσα, η οποία τιμωρείται στο κράτος μέλος εκδόσεως του εντάλματος με ποινή «κατ’ ανώτατο όριο τριών ετών», κατά την έννοια του άρθρου 2, παράγραφος 2, της αποφάσεως-πλαισίου 2002/584. Το εν λόγω δικαστήριο εκτιμά ότι και οι λοιπές πράξεις για τις οποίες κατηγορείται ο NJ, όπως η παράνομη βία, τιμωρούνται, στο κράτος μέλος εκδόσεως καθώς και στο κράτος μέλος στο οποίο απευθύνεται το αίτημα, με ποινή διαρκείας τουλάχιστον δώδεκα μηνών.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Η Εισαγγελία της Βιέννης"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "άρθρου 2, παράγραφος 2, της αποφάσεως-πλαισίου 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Η Εισαγγελία της Βιέννης"->"άσκησε ποινική δίωξη.";
  "άσκησε ποινική δίωξη"->"NJ";
  "άσκησε ποινική δίωξη"->"κλοπή κατ’ επάγγελμα τελεσθείσα."[dir=none];
  "κλοπή κατ’ επάγγελμα τελεσθείσα."->"άρθρου 2, παράγραφος 2, της αποφάσεως-πλαισίου 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: French

Le parquet de Vienne a engagé des poursuites pénales à l’encontre de NJ en raison de quatre faits, que la juridiction de renvoi qualifie, notamment, de vol commis à titre professionnel, passible dans l’État membre d’émission, selon la juridiction de renvoi, d’une peine « d’un maximum d’au moins trois ans », au sens de l’article 2, paragraphe 2, de la décision-cadre 2002/584. Cette juridiction estime que d’autres faits reprochés à NJ, tels que la coercition, sont passibles, dans l’État membre d’émission ainsi que dans l’État membre requis, d’une peine d’un maximum d’au moins douze mois.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Le parquet de Vienne"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "l’article 2, paragraphe 2, de la décision-cadre 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Le parquet de Vienne"->"a engagé des poursuites pénales.";
  "a engagé des poursuites pénales"->"NJ";
  "a engagé des poursuites pénales"->"vol commis à titre professionnel."[dir=none];
  "vol commis à titre professionnel."->"l’article 2, paragraphe 2, de la décision-cadre 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Croatian

Državno odvjetništvo u Beču pokrenulo je kazneni progon protiv osobe NJ zbog četiriju kaznenih djela, koja je sud koji je uputio zahtjev okvalificirao kao, među ostalim, krađu počinjenu u profesionalnom svojstvu, koja je u državi članici izdavanja kažnjiva, prema navodima suda koji je uputio zahtjev, „najvišom kaznom zatvora od najmanje tri godine”, u smislu članka 2. stavka 2. Okvirne odluke 2002/584. Prema navodima tog suda, druga su kaznena djela koja se stavljaju na teret osobi NJ, poput prisile, u državi članici izdavanja i u državi članici izvršenja kažnjiva kaznom zatvora od najmanje dvanaest mjeseci.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Državno odvjetništvo u Beču"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "članka 2. stavka 2. Okvirne odluke 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Državno odvjetništvo u Beču"->"pokrenulo je kazneni progon.";
  "pokrenulo je kazneni progon"->"NJ";
  "pokrenulo je kazneni progon"->"krađu počinjenu u profesionalnom svojstvu."[dir=none];
  "krađu počinjenu u profesionalnom svojstvu."->"članka 2. stavka 2. Okvirne odluke 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Italian

La procura di Vienna ha esercitato l’azione penale nei confronti di NJ per quattro fatti che il giudice del rinvio qualifica, segnatamente, come furto commesso a titolo professionale, punibile nello Stato membro emittente, secondo il giudice del rinvio, con una pena «della durata massima non inferiore a tre anni», ai sensi dell’articolo 2, paragrafo 2, della decisione quadro 2002/584. Tale giudice ritiene che altri fatti contestati a NJ, quali la coercizione, siano punibili, nello Stato membro emittente nonché nello Stato membro richiesto, con una pena della durata massima non inferiore a dodici mesi.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "La procura di Vienna"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolo 2, paragrafo 2, della decisione quadro 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "La procura di Vienna"->"ha esercitato l’azione penale.";
  "ha esercitato l’azione penale"->"NJ";
  "ha esercitato l’azione penale"->"furto commesso a titolo professionale."[dir=none];
  "furto commesso a titolo professionale."->"articolo 2, paragrafo 2, della decisione quadro 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Latvian

Vīnes prokuratūra pret NJ uzsāka kriminālvajāšanu, ņemot vērā četrus faktus, ko iesniedzējtiesa kvalificē kā profesionāli izdarītas zādzības, par kurām izsniegšanas dalībvalstī, kā uzskata iesniedzējtiesa, ir piespriežams “vismaz trīs gadus ilgs maksimālais” sods Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 2. panta 2. punkta izpratnē. Šī tiesa uzskata, ka par citiem NJ inkriminētajiem faktiem, piemēram, iebiedēšanu, izsniegšanas dalībvalstī, kā arī pieprasījuma saņēmējdalībvalstī ir piespriežams vismaz divpadsmit mēnešu ilgs maksimālais sods.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Vīnes prokuratūra"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 2. panta 2. punkta"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Vīnes prokuratūra"->"uzsāka kriminālvajāšanu.";
  "uzsāka kriminālvajāšanu"->"NJ";
  "uzsāka kriminālvajāšanu"->"profesionāli izdarītas zādzības."[dir=none];
  "profesionāli izdarītas zādzības."->"Pamatlēmuma 2002/584 2. panta 2. punkta"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

Vienos prokuratūra pradėjo NJ baudžiamąjį persekiojimą dėl keturių veikų; jas prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikęs teismas kvalifikuoja kaip vagystę, už kurią išduodančiojoje valstybėje narėje, kaip teigia prašymą priimti prejudicinį sprendimą pateikęs teismas, baudžiama laisvės atėmimo bausme, kurios „ilgiausias terminas – bent treji metai“, kaip tai suprantama pagal Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 2 straipsnio 2 dalį. Šis teismas mano, kad dėl kitų NJ inkriminuojamų veikų, pavyzdžiui, prievartos naudojimo, išduodančiojoje valstybėje narėje ir valstybėje narėje, į kurią kreipiamasi, skiriama laisvės atėmimo bausmė, kurios ilgiausias terminas – bent 12 mėnesių.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Vienos prokuratūra"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 2 straipsnio 2 dalį"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Vienos prokuratūra"->"pradėjo NJ baudžiamąjį persekiojimą.";
  "pradėjo NJ baudžiamąjį persekiojimą"->"NJ";
  "pradėjo NJ baudžiamąjį persekiojimą"->"Vagystė, įvykdyta einant profesines pareigas."[dir=none];
  "Vagystė, įvykdyta einant profesines pareigas."->"Pagrindų sprendimo 2002/584 2 straipsnio 2 dalį"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

A bécsi ügyészség büntetőeljárást indított NJ‑vel szemben négy cselekmény miatt, amelyeket a kérdést előterjesztő bíróság üzletszerűen elkövetett lopásnak minősít, és amelyek esetében „a büntetési tétel felső határa” a kibocsátó tagállamban a kérdést előterjesztő bíróság szerint a 2002/584 kerethatározat 2. cikkének (2) bekezdése értelmében vett, „legalább háromévi szabadságvesztés”. E bíróság szerint az NJ terhére rótt más cselekmények, úgymint kényszerítés esetén a büntetési tétel felső határa a kibocsátó tagállamban és a megkeresett tagállamban is legalább tizenkét hónap szabadságvesztés.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "A bécsi ügyészség"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "2002/584 kerethatározat 2. cikkének (2) bekezdése"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "A bécsi ügyészség"->"büntetőeljárást indított.";
  "büntetőeljárást indított"->"NJ";
  "büntetőeljárást indított"->"üzletszerűen elkövetett lopás."[dir=none];
  "üzletszerűen elkövetett lopás."->"2002/584 kerethatározat 2. cikkének (2) bekezdése"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Maltese

L-Uffiċċju tal-Prosekutur ta’ Vjenna beda proċeduri kriminali kontra NJ minħabba erba’ fatti, li l-qorti tar-rinviju tikklassifika, b’mod partikolari, bħala serq imwettaq fuq bażi professjonali, punibbli fl-Istat Membru emittenti, skont il-qorti tar-rinviju, b’piena “ta’ massimu ta’ mill-inqas tliet snin”, fis-sens tal-Artikolu 2(2) tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584. Din il-qorti tqis li fatti oħra allegati kontra NJ, bħall-koerċizzjoni, huma punibbli, fl-Istat Membru emittenti kif ukoll fl-Istat Membru mitlub, b’piena massima ta’ mill-inqas tnax‑il xahar.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "L-Uffiċċju tal-Prosekutur ta’ Vjenna"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Artikolu 2(2) tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "L-Uffiċċju tal-Prosekutur ta’ Vjenna"->"beda proċeduri kriminali.";
  "beda proċeduri kriminali"->"NJ";
  "beda proċeduri kriminali"->"serq imwettaq fuq bażi professjonali."[dir=none];
  "serq imwettaq fuq bażi professjonali."->"Artikolu 2(2) tad-Deċiżjoni Qafas 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Het openbaar ministerie Wenen heeft een strafrechtelijke vervolging ingesteld tegen NJ op grond van vier feiten die door de verwijzende rechter worden omschreven als, met name, beroepsmatige diefstal, waarop volgens de verwijzende rechter in de uitvaardigende lidstaat een vrijheidsstraf staat „met een maximum van ten minste drie jaar” in de zin van artikel 2, lid 2, van kaderbesluit 2002/584. Deze rechterlijke instantie is van oordeel dat andere feiten waarvan NJ wordt verdacht, zoals het uitoefenen van dwang, zowel in de uitvaardigende lidstaat als in de aangezochte lidstaat strafbaar zijn gesteld met een tot vrijheidsbeneming strekkende maatregel met een maximum van ten minste twaalf maanden.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Het openbaar ministerie Wenen"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artikel 2, lid 2, van kaderbesluit 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Het openbaar ministerie Wenen"->"heeft een strafrechtelijke vervolging ingesteld.";
  "heeft een strafrechtelijke vervolging ingesteld"->"NJ";
  "heeft een strafrechtelijke vervolging ingesteld"->"beroepsmatige diefstal."[dir=none];
  "beroepsmatige diefstal."->"artikel 2, lid 2, van kaderbesluit 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Polish

Prokuratura w Wiedniu wszczęła przeciwko NJ postępowanie karne w związku z czterema czynami, które sąd odsyłający kwalifikuje między innymi jako kradzież stanowiącą stałe źródło dochodu, podlegającą w państwie członkowskim wydającym nakaz, jak twierdzi sąd odsyłający, karze, „której górna granica wynosi przynajmniej trzy lata” w rozumieniu art. 2 ust. 2 decyzji ramowej 2002/584. Sąd ten uważa, że pozostałe czyny zarzucane NJ, takie jak zmuszanie, podlegają w wydającym nakaz państwie członkowskim i w wykonującym nakaz państwie członkowskim karze, której górna granica wynosi przynajmniej 12 miesięcy.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Prokuratura w Wiedniu"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "art. 2 ust. 2 decyzji ramowej 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Prokuratura w Wiedniu"->"wszczęła przeciwko NJ postępowanie karne.";
  "wszczęła przeciwko NJ postępowanie karne"->"NJ";
  "wszczęła przeciwko NJ postępowanie karne"->"kradzież stanowiącą stałe źródło dochodu."[dir=none];
  "kradzież stanowiącą stałe źródło dochodu."->"art. 2 ust. 2 decyzji ramowej 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

A Procuradoria de Viena instaurou um processo penal contra NJ, por quatro factos que o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio qualifica, nomeadamente, de furto cometido a título profissional, punível no Estado‑Membro de emissão, segundo o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio, com uma pena de «duração máxima não inferior a três anos», na aceção do artigo 2.o, n.o 2, da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584. Este órgão jurisdicional considera que outros factos imputados a NJ, tais como a coação, são puníveis no Estado‑Membro de emissão e no Estado‑Membro requerente com uma pena máxima de pelo menos doze meses.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "A Procuradoria de Viena"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "artigo 2.o, n.o 2, da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "A Procuradoria de Viena"->"instaurou um processo penal.";
  "instaurou um processo penal"->"NJ";
  "instaurou um processo penal"->"furto cometido a título profissional."[dir=none];
  "furto cometido a título profissional."->"artigo 2.o, n.o 2, da Decisão‑Quadro 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Romanian

Parchetul din Viena a început urmărirea penală împotriva lui NJ pentru săvârșirea a patru fapte, pe care instanța de trimitere le califică, printre altele, drept furt săvârșit cu titlu profesional, pasibil în statul membru emitent, potrivit instanței de trimitere, de o pedeapsă „a cărei durată maximă este de cel puțin trei ani”, în sensul articolului 2 alineatul (2) din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584. Această instanță apreciază că alte fapte care îi sunt imputate lui NJ, precum constrângerea, sunt pasibile, în statul membru emitent, precum și în statul membru solicitat, de o pedeapsă al cărei maxim este de cel puțin 12 luni.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Parchetul din Viena"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "articolului 2 alineatul (2) din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Parchetul din Viena"->"a început urmărirea penală.";
  "a început urmărirea penală"->"NJ";
  "a început urmărirea penală"->"furt săvârșit cu titlu profesional."[dir=none];
  "furt săvârșit cu titlu profesional."->"articolului 2 alineatul (2) din Decizia‑cadru 2002/584"[dir=none];
}
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 October 2019.
NJ.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — European arrest warrant — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — Article 1(1) — Concept of ‘European arrest warrant’ — Minimum requirements on which validity depends — Article 6(1) — Concept of ‘issuing judicial authority’ — European arrest warrant issued by the public prosecutor’s office of a Member State — Status — Whether subordinate to a body of the executive — Power of a Minister for Justice to issue instructions in a specific case — Certification of the European arrest warrant by a court before its transmission.
Case C-489/19 PPU. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Prokuratúra vo Viedni začala proti NJ trestné stíhanie pre štyri skutky, ktoré vnútroštátny súd kvalifikuje okrem iného ako opakovanú krádež na účely stáleho zisku (gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl), za ktorú možno vo vydávajúcom členskom štáte uložiť podľa vnútroštátneho súdu trest „s hornou hranicou trestnej sadzby najmenej 3 roky“ v zmysle článku 2 ods. 2 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584. Vnútroštátny súd sa domnieva, že za ostatné skutky vytýkané NJ, ako je napríklad trestný čin nátlaku, možno vo vydávajúcom členskom štáte, ako aj v dožiadanom členskom štáte, uložiť trest s hornou hranicou trestnej sadzby najmenej 12 mesiacov.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Prokuratúra vo Viedni"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "NJ"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "článku 2 ods. 2 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584"[shape=trapezium];
    
  "Prokuratúra vo Viedni"->"začala proti NJ trestné stíhanie.";
  "začala proti NJ trestné stíhanie"->"NJ";
  "začala proti NJ trestné stíhanie"->"opakovanú krádež na účely stáleho zisku (gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl)."[dir=none];
  "opakovanú krádež na účely stáleho zisku (gewerbsmäßiger Diebstahl)."->"článku 2 ods. 2 rámcového rozhodnutia 2002/584"[dir=none];
}