Reports of Cases
2006 I-02333
Subject-matter
Interpretation of Arts. 54 and 71 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement – Ne bis in idem principle – Person prosecuted in a Member State for illegally exporting drugs after having been prosecuted and convicted in Norway for illegal importing drugs before the Schengen Agreement was applicable to that State
Systematic classification scheme
1.
|
|
A The Community legal order
A-01 Sources of Community law
A-01.02 General principles of law
A-01.02.15 Ne bis in idem
|
|
|
G European Union
G-03 Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters
G-03.02 Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement
G-03.02.01 Ne bis in idem principle
|
|
|
A The Community legal order
A-01 Sources of Community law
A-01.02 General principles of law
A-01.02.15 Ne bis in idem
|
|
|
G European Union
G-03 Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters
G-03.02 Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement
G-03.02.01 Ne bis in idem principle
|
Citations of case-law or legislation
References in grounds of judgment
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A01 : paragraph 3
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A02P1L1 : paragraph 5
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A02P1L2 : paragraph 6
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A06L1 : paragraph 9
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 30
: paragraph 6
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 31
: paragraphs 6, 29
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 34
: paragraphs 6, 29
-
Agreement with Third Countries or International Bodies - 21999A0710(02)
: paragraph 9
-
Agreement with Third Countries or International Bodies - 21999A0710(02)
-A15P4 : paragraph 10
-
Decision 1999/436
-A02 : paragraph 6
-
Decision 1999/436
-NA : paragraph 6
-
Decision 2000/777
-A01LB : paragraph 10
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(01)
: paragraphs 4, 29
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A54 : paragraphs 1, 6, 7, 10, 11, 16 - 18, 20, 22 - 25, 27 - 29 - 33, 36, 40 - 42
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A55 : paragraph 29
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A56 : paragraph 29
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A57 : paragraph 29
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A58 : paragraph 29
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A71 : paragraphs 1, 6, 8, 10, 11, 39 - 41
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -238/99
: paragraph 40
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -187/01
: paragraphs 29, 30, 33
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -469/03
: paragraph 33
Operative part
Opinion
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A02P1L1 : point 1
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A02P1L2 : point 6
-
Treaty of Amsterdam 1997 - Protocol No 2
-A06 : point 3
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 2
-L1T4 : point 26
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 31
: points 7, 10
-
EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 34
: points 7, 10
-
Decision 1999/435
: point 6
-
Decision 1999/436
: point 6
-
Decision 1999/436
-A02 : point 7
-
Decision 1999/436
-NA : point 7
-
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000)
-A50 : point 48
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(01)
: point 1
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
: point 1
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A54 : points 4, 7, 9, 15, 16, 18, 22, 28, 29, 32, 34, 35, 41, 46, 49, 51, 52, 56, 59, 60
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A55 : point 7
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A56 : point 7
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A57 : point 7
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A58 : point 7
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(02)
-A71 : points 10, 16, 59, 60
-
Agreement between Member States - 42000A0922(03)
: point 1
-
Court of Justice - Judgment C -187/01
: points 18, 33, 57
Dates
Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings
Date of the Opinion
Date of the hearing
Information not available
Date of delivery
09/03/2006
References
Publication in the Official Journal
Application: OJ C 300 from 04.12.2004, p.35
Judgment: OJ C 131 from 03.06.2006, p.18
Name of the parties
Van Esbroeck
Notes on Academic Writings
- Jimeno Fernández, Fructuoso: Algunas reflexiones sobre el principio ne bis in idem y el artículo 54 del Convenio de aplicación de Schengen (Comentario a la STJCE Van Esbroeck (C-436/2004) de 9 de marzo de 2006), Diario La ley 2006 nº 6496 p.1-9
- Mock, Hanspeter: "Ne bis in idem". Une locution dont le sens ne semble pas être le même à Luxembourg qu'à Strasbourg. (Arrêt C-436/04 de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes, du 9 mars 2005, Leopold Henri Van Esbroeck), Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme 2006 p.635-645
- Komárek, Jan: "Tentýž čin" v prostoru svobody, bezpečnosti a práva, Jurisprudence : specialista na komentování judikatury 2006 p.51-57
- Kauff-Gazin, Fabienne: Convention d'application de l'accord de Schengen, Europe 2006 Mai Comm. nº 147 p.16
- Rosbaud, Christian: Die Vorabentscheidung des EuGH im Fall Van Esbroeck, Rs C-436/04, Österreichische Juristenzeitung 2006 p.669-672
- Rübenstahl, Markus: "Dieselbe Tat" im Anwendungsbereich des Art. 54 SDÜ oder die Erkenntnis, dass Schengen mutiert ist, European Law Reporter 2006 p.329-335
- Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2006 nº 488
- Kühne, Hans-Heiner: Juristenzeitung 2006 p.1019-1021
- Guillain, Christine: L'application du principe non bis in idem au trafic de drogues. Analyse de l'arrêt de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes du 9 mars 2006, Journal des tribunaux 2007 p.144-149
- Sviežený, Richard: Princíp ne bis in idem, v rozhodnutiach Európskeho súdneho dvora III, Justicná revue : casopis pre právnu prax. Príloha 2007 p.728-740
- Van Bockel, Bas: Common Market Law Review 2008 p.223-244
Procedural Analysis Information
Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling
Hof van Cassatie - Belgium
Subject-matter
- Justice and home affairs
- Closer cooperation
Provisions of national law referred to
Information not available
Provisions of international law referred to
Information not available
Procedure and result
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
Formation of the Court
deuxième chambre (Cour)
Judge-Rapporteur
Schintgen
Advocate General
Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer
Language(s) of the Case
Language(s) of the Opinion