Key facts of the case:
(Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement (CISA) – Ne bis in idem principle – Pre-trial finding of ‘non-lieu’(‘no case to answer’) barring further prosecution of the same person for the same facts – Finding subject to the possibility of new facts and/or evidence emerging – Criminal prosecution in another Member State for an offence arising out of the same facts)
Results (sanctions) and key consequences of the case:
In the light of the foregoing, I propose that the Court should give the following answer to the question referred by the Tribunale di Fermo (Italy):
Article 54 of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement should be interpreted as meaning that a definitive decision of ‘non-lieu’ terminating criminal proceedings, reached following a detailed investigation, which precludes further prosecution of the same person for the same facts but which, in accordance with national law, may be set aside if new facts and/or evidence emerge, is a decision that finally disposes of the case and gives rise to the application of the ne bis in idem principle enshrined in that article.
Paragraphs referring to EU Charter: