Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 9 March 2006.

Criminal proceedings against Leopold Henri Van Esbroeck.

Reference for a preliminary ruling: Hof van Cassatie - Belgium.

Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement - Articles 54 and 71 - Ne bis in idem principle - Application ratione temporis - Concept of "the same acts' - Import and export of narcotic drugs subject to legal proceedings in different Contracting States.

Case C-436/04.


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
03/06/2006 Van Esbroeck
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2006:165
09/03/2006 Van Esbroeck
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2006:165
09/03/2006 Van Esbroeck
Application (OJ)
04/12/2004 Van Esbroeck
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2005:630
20/10/2005 Van Esbroeck
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

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

Operative part

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 13/10/2004

Date of the Opinion

  • 20/10/2005

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

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. Komárek, Jan: "Tentýž čin" v prostoru svobody, bezpečnosti a práva, Jurisprudence : specialista na komentování judikatury 2006 p.51-57
  4. Kauff-Gazin, Fabienne: Convention d'application de l'accord de Schengen, Europe 2006 Mai Comm. nº 147 p.16
  5. Rosbaud, Christian: Die Vorabentscheidung des EuGH im Fall Van Esbroeck, Rs C-436/04, Österreichische Juristenzeitung 2006 p.669-672
  6. Rübenstahl, Markus: "Dieselbe Tat" im Anwendungsbereich des Art. 54 SDÜ oder die Erkenntnis, dass Schengen mutiert ist, European Law Reporter 2006 p.329-335
  7. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2006 nº 488
  8. Kühne, Hans-Heiner: Juristenzeitung 2006 p.1019-1021
  9. 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
  10. Sviežený, Richard: Princíp ne bis in idem, v rozhodnutiach Európskeho súdneho dvora III, Justicná revue : casopis pre právnu prax. Príloha 2007 p.728-740
  11. 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

  • Dutch

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • Spanish