Sentences with phrase «idem principle»

A company can always notify the authorities in different jurisdictions of the ongoing investigation in Greece, to avoid multiple prosecution or sanctions and a potential breach of the ne bis in idem principle.

See question 5 as well as paragraph 17 of the preamble to Directive 2014 / 41 / EU regarding the European investigation order in criminal matters, which allows an EIO aiming «to establish whether a possible conflict with the ne bis in idem principle exists».

The transnational effect of the ne bis in idem principle (which is established in section 17, paragraph 1 StPO) is based on international agreements to which Austria is a party (see Birklbauer in Fuchs and Ratz, Wiener Kommentar zur StPO, § 17).

That being so, the question is whether, as a result of this occasio, the Union judicature must interpret, with inevitably general consequences, the scope of the ne bis in idem principle in Swedish law, an interpretation which must take priority over the one which is derived from Sweden's constitutional structure and international obligations.

Is this contrary to the ne bis in idem principle?

The difficulty, in so far as it exists, with the conception of the scope of the ne bis in idem principle in Swedish law is a general difficulty regarding the structure of the Swedish law on penalties which is, as such, completely independent from the collection of VAT, where punishment of the conduct in the present case, involving the falsification of information, is treated as a mere occasio.

The second essay in this section by Alexandros - Ioannis Kargopoulos looks at the evolution of the jurisprudence of the CJEU pertaining to the ne bis in idem principle.

In particular, as stressed in the opinion, the ne bis in idem principle does not apply to truly administrative sanctions, and — most importantly — this would not mean that Member States can not provide for both responses «in the books».

In Bonda and Åkerberg Fransson, the CJEU clarified that, also according to the CFREU, if the first administrative sanction is criminal in nature, then the EU ne bis in idem principle applies, and this should be directly assessed by the national judge — without waiting for the enactment of new legislation.

In that regard, the limitation provided by Article 55 would not only risk emptying the content of ne bis in idem principle, but it is neither necessary, nor useful to «meet objectives of general interest recognised by the Union».

In that case, which lead to the preliminary reference, Mr Åkerberg Fransson submitted that these criminal charges should be dismissed on the ground that he had already been punished for those acts and that these criminal proceedings were therefore in violation of the ne bis in idem principle laid down in article 50 of the Charter.

The CJEU may increase the safeguards for suspects — as it has been doing for some ten years now — extending the concept of a «final decision'triggering the application of the ne bis in idem principle.

Yet what is more, since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, the ne bis in idem principle has become a yardstick of the systemic impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFREU) on secondary EU law.

Affirming that a partial execution of an autonomous part of a composed penalty can neither fulfil the «enforcement process», the CJEU considerably stretched the scope of the condition and limited the protection offered by the ne bis in idem principle.

Not exact matches

Ne bis in idem is a fundamental principle of EU criminal law, protecting citizens against double prosecution, even in transnational situations.

It also repeats the potential tension with the principle of ne bis in idem.

Chapter 10 (by Martin Böse) then discusses one procedural safeguard that is closely linked to the risk of the consecutive application of different types of sanctions: the principle of ne bis in idem.

Both questions are crucial for the development of a consistent EU case law on the principle of ne bis in idem.

This comprehensive analysis discusses the challenges when applying such a principle in the EU context and concludes that the CJEU has positively contributed to transforming ne bis in idem from a traditional principle of procedure to a fundamental right with the result of influencing the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

Ne bis in idem is a principle of EU fundamental rights that kept the CJEU busy also during this year.