Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 5 July 2016

Criminal proceedings against Atanas Ognyanov

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski gradski sad

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 267 TFEU — Article 94 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court — Content of a request for a preliminary ruling — National rule providing that the national court is to be disqualified because it stated a provisional opinion in the request for a preliminary ruling when setting out the factual and legal context — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Second paragraph of Article 47 and Article 48(1)

Case C-614/14


Top of the page Documents in the Case
Document Date Name of the parties Subject-matter Curia EUR-Lex Autres Liens
Judgment (OJ)
26/08/2016 Ognyanov
Principles of Union law
  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights
View pdf documents
Judgment
ECLI:EU:C:2016:514		 05/07/2016 Ognyanov
Principles of Union law
  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Judgment (Summary)
ECLI:EU:C:2016:514		 05/07/2016 Ognyanov
Principles of Union law
  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Application (OJ)
06/03/2015 Ognyanov
Principles of Union law
  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights
View pdf documents
Opinion
ECLI:EU:C:2016:111		 23/02/2016 Ognyanov
Principles of Union law
  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights
EUR-Lex text EUR-Lex bilingual text
Top of the page Legal analysis of the decision or of the case

Reports of Cases

published in the electronic Reports of Cases (Court Reports - general)

Subject-matter

Information not available

Systematic classification scheme

1.
-
1 The legal order of the European Union
  1.04 Fundamental rights
    1.04.03 The fundamental rights
      1.04.03.47 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
-
1 The legal order of the European Union
  1.04 Fundamental rights
    1.04.03 The fundamental rights
      1.04.03.48 Presumption of innocence and right of defence
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.04 Reference for a preliminary ruling
    3.04.00 General
-
3 Legal proceedings
  3.04 Reference for a preliminary ruling
    3.04.01 Reference to the Court of Justice
      3.04.01.03 Exclusive nature of the role of the national court in making the reference
-
1 The legal order of the European Union
  1.05 EU law and national law
    1.05.01 Direct effect, primacy and uniform application of EU law


Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

Operative part

Opinion


Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

  • 31/12/2014

Date of the Opinion

  • 23/02/2016

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

05/07/2016


References

Publication in the Official Journal

Judgment: OJ C 335 from 12.09.2016, p.8

Application: OJ C 96 from 23.03.2015, p.6

Name of the parties

Ognyanov

Notes on Academic Writings

  1. Verhoeven, M.J.M.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 2016 Afl.42 p.2438-2439 (NL)
  2. Ungerank, Wilhelm: EuGH stärkt die Stellung der vorlegenden Gerichte im Vorabentscheidungsverfahren, European Law Reporter 2016 p.142-148 (DE)
  3. Rigaux, Anne: Compétences et obligations du juge de renvoi, Europe 2016 Octobre Comm. nº 10 p.16-18 (FR)
  4. Takis, Athanasios: Armenopoulos 2016 p.1632-1633 (EL)
  5. Berger, Maria ; Maderbacher, Gregor: Darstellung des Verfahrensgegenstands durch das vorlegende Gericht in einem Vorabentscheidungsersuchen bewirkt keine Befangenheit, Österreichische Juristenzeitung 2016 p.891-892 (DE)
  6. Fierstra, M.A.: Prejudiciële vragen: geen bijzonder geval van partijdigheid van de verwijzende rechter, S.E.W. ; Sociaal-economische wetgeving 2017 p.87-91 (NL)
  7. Kaufmann, Sven: Le Bundesverfassungsgericht et les limites à la primauté du droit de l'Union. Confrontation ou complémentarité dans l'intégration européenne ?, Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 2017 p.59-73 (FR)
  8. Reijntjes, J.M.: Verzoek om een prejudiciële beslissing, ingediend door Sofiyski gradski sad (rechtbank te Sofia, Bulgarije) bij beslissing van 25 november 2014. Justitiële samenwerking in strafzaken. Kaderbesluit 2008/909/JBZ. Het op de tenuitvoerlegging van een sanctie toepasselijke recht. Uitlegging van een nationale regel van de tenuitvoerleggingsstaat die voorziet in strafverkorting wegens de arbeid die de gevonniste persoon tijdens zijn detentie in de beslissingsstaat heeft verricht. Rechtsgevolgen van kaderbesluiten. Verplichting tot conforme uitlegging., Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2017 nº39 p.5212-5214 (NL)
  9. Vasileva, Elitsa: The Case "Ognyanov" - Two Steps Forward, Европейски правен преглед 2017 nº XVII p.166-182 (BG)
  10. Kornezov, Alexander: Ten Years of Preliminary References from Bulgaria - A Critical Appraisal, Европейски правен преглед 2017 nº XVIII p.21-42 (BG)



Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Sofiyski gradski sad (Tribunal de la ville de Sofia) - Bulgaria

Subject-matter

  • Principles of Union law
  • Fundamental rights

Provisions of national law referred to

Наказателно-процесуален кодекс (Code de procédure pénale), article 49) ; Кодекс за етичното поведение на магистрата (Code relatif au comportement éthique du magistrat), points 2.3 et 7.4

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

  • Reference for a preliminary ruling

Formation of the Court

Grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Berger

Advocate General

Bot

Language(s) of the Case

  • Bulgarian

Language(s) of the Opinion

  • French