Compatibility of national criminal procedure law with Art. 6(3) of Directive 2012/13 on the right to information in criminal proceedings and Art. 47 CFR - Lack of a procedural rule for the rectification, after completion of the first hearing in criminal proceedings (preliminary hearing), of substantive ambiguities and shortcomings in the bill of indictment - Interpretation obligations of national criminal courts.

Are Article 21 and Article 67(2) TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that they preclude national legislation (in this case, Paragraph 2(3) of the Gesetz über die Verarbeitung von Fluggastdaten zur Umsetzung der Richtlinie (EU) 2016/681 of 6 June 2017 (Law on the Processing of Passenger Name Record (PNR) Data for the purpose of transposing Directive (EU) 2016/681 [BGBl (Federal Law Gazette) I, p. 1484], as amended by Article 2 of the Law of 6 June 2017, BGBl I, p. 1484), (‘the FlugDaG’), that provides, in application of the flexibility clause in Article 2(1) of Directive (EU) 2016/681 1 (‘the PNR Directive’), for air carriers to transfer comprehensive data on every single passenger of also intra-EU flights to the passenger information units (PIUs) established by the Member States where, except for the flight booking, the data are retained without …

Compatibility of the PNR Directive 2016/681 with fundamental rights

Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant - follow-up to CJEU judgment in Bob-Dogi C-241/15, (ECLI:EU:C:2016:385) - dual level of protection - national arrest warrant (NAW) and European arrest warrant both taken by a public prosecutor - NAW is limited to detaining the individual for a maximum of 72 hours for the purpose of bringing him before a Court

Interpretation of Directive 2014/67/EU - Posting of workers - enforcement through administrative fines - Obligations relating to the reporting of workers and the retention of records of wages – Penalties for failure to comply – Requirement of proportionality of the said penalties, laid down in Article 20 of that directive – Direct effect

The case is related to Case C-384/17 and involves a change of approach by the CJEU in view of the direct effect of a Directive's obligation to foresee effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties.

Does the ne bis in idem principle preclude the issuance of a European arrest warrant within the meaning of Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA 1 of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States, and taking into account Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, where the criminal case has been finally closed by a judicial decision to acquit or to discontinue the case, if those decisions have been adopted on the basis of an amnesty that has been revoked by the legislature after the decisions became final and the domestic legal order provides that revocation of such an amnesty entails annulment of decisions of public authorities, where they have been adopted and substantiated on the basis of amnesties or pardons, and the legal obstacles of criminal prosecutions that …

Interpretation of Art. 27 Framework Decision 2002/584/JI on the European Arrest Warrant - Possible prosecution for other crimes - principle of speciality

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Conduct investigated by two national competition authorities – Principle ne bis in idem – Simultaneous application of EU and national competition law – Identity of the protected legal interest – Territorial effects of a decision of a national competition authority – Leniency programme

Is Directive (EU) 2016/681 1 compatible with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) in relation to the following points:

(1) Are the PNR data to be transferred under the directive sufficiently specified, having regard to Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter?

(2) In view of its scope and having regard to Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter, does the directive provide for sufficient objective differentiation when PNR data are collected and transferred, in relation to the type of flights and the threat level in a particular country and in relation to the comparison against databases and patterns?

(3) Is the blanket, indiscriminating retention period for all PNR data compatible with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter?

(4) Having regard to Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter, …

Compatibility of the PNR Directive (Directive (EU) 2016/681 of 27 April 2016) with Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights - Sufficient Specification - Objective differentiation in relation to the type of flights and the threat level in a particular country and in relation to the comparison against databases and patterns - Retention period - Adequate procedural protection of passengers - Data transfer to third countries and adequate protection level

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Telecommunications – Processing of personal data – Confidentiality of communications – Electronic communications service providers – Directive 2002/58/EC – Article 15(1) – Article 4(2) TEU – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7, 8, 11 and 52(1) – General and indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data – Access to retained data – Use of retained data as evidence in criminal proceedings

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA – Mutual recognition of financial penalties – Article 5(1) – Offence relating to ‘conduct which infringes road traffic regulations’ – Scope of the offence – Financial penalty imposed by the issuing State on the vehicle owner on account of a breach of the obligation to identify the driver suspected of being responsible for committing a road traffic offence – Article 7(1) – Grounds for non-recognition and non-execution – Scope of and procedures for the verification by the executing State vis-à-vis the legal classification of the offence

(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle ne bis in idem – Fine imposed by a national postal regulator – Fine imposed by a national competition authority

Must the requirements which an European arrest warrant must satisfy as a judicial decision under Articles 1(1) and 6(1) of Framework Decision 2002/584 1 be applied also to supplementary information provided pursuant to Article 15(2) thereof, where, for the purposes of the decision of the executing judicial authority, it substantially supplements or changes the content of the arrest warrant originally issued?

Common fisheries policy - National provision which, to penalise a breach of Article 32 of Regulation No 850/98, provides for not only the imposition of a fine but also the mandatory forfeiture of the catches and the prohibited or non-compliant fishing gear found on board the vessel concerned, is compliant with the principle of proportionality enshrined in Art. 49(3) of the Charter

Directive 2014/41/EU – European Investigation Order in criminal matters – Issuing authority – Administrative authority designated as a public prosecutor’s office in criminal proceedings relating to tax offences – Requirement of judicial validation