You are here:

CJEU - C 108/16 PPU / Opinion

Openbaar Ministerie v. Paweł Dworzecki

Policy area:
Justice, freedom and security
Deciding Body type:
Court of Justice of the European Union
Deciding Body:
Advocate General
Decision date:

Key facts of the case:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Urgent preliminary ruling procedure — Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA — European arrest warrant — Surrender procedures between Member States — Optional grounds for non-execution — Sentence handed down in absentia — ‘Summons in person’ — ‘Official notification by other means’ — EU law — Autonomous concepts

Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:

  1. In the light of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court of Justice should answer the questions submitted by the Rechtbank Amsterdam (District Court, Amsterdam) as follows:

    (1) Article 4a(1)(a)(i) of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, as amended by Council Framework Decision 2009/299/JHA of 26 February 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that it contains autonomous minimum guarantees compliance with which must be verified independently by the executing judicial authority with a view to executing a European arrest warrant issued for the purpose of executing a decision handed down where the person concerned did not appear in person at his trial.

    (2) Article 4a(1)(a)(i) of Framework Decision 2002/584, as amended by Framework Decision 2009/299, must be interpreted as meaning that the person concerned must have been summoned, according to the national procedural rules applicable, directly in person or, if not, that it must be unequivocally established from the information provided by the issuing authority that he was aware of the scheduled trial as a result of having actually received official information of the scheduled date and place of the trial.