Breian (Addendum : Judicial cooperation in criminal matters-European arrest warrant - Surrender of requested persons to the issuing judicial authorities) {2024] EUECJ C-318/24_PPU0 (09 May 2024

Breian (Addendum : Judicial cooperation in criminal matters-European arrest warrant - Surrender of requested persons to the issuing judicial authorities) {2024] EUECJ C-318/24_PPU0 (09 May 2024

An executing authority is not bound to refuse surrender solely because another Member State has refused; it must conduct its own assessment, taking into account previous refusals and underlying reasons. Irregularities in judge's oath only justify refusal if they create a real risk of violation of fair trial rights. Decisions by Interpol CCF or other bodies may be considered but are not determinative. Issuing authorities are not obliged to refer to CJEU unless their decision is final and unappealable. Detention conditions must meet EU standards, and authorities must allow for information exchange before refusal.

Parties
Requested Person: P. P. R.; Prosecuting Authority: Parchetul de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie - Direcţia Naţională Anticorupţie - Serviciul Teritorial Braşov; Issuing Judicial Authority: Curtea de Apel Braşov; Intervener: Government of Romania; Intervener: Ireland; Intervener: Government of France; Intervener: Government of Malta; Intervener: European Commission
Jurisdiction
European Union
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Reference / Final Judgment
Outcome
Questions answered; preliminary reference resolved
Legal Topics
European Arrest Warrant, Judicial Cooperation, Recognition and Execution of Judgments, Fundamental Rights, Detention Conditions, Trial Fairness
Criminal Law EU Law Human Rights European Arrest Warrant Judicial Cooperation Recognition and Execution of Judgments Fundamental Rights Detention Conditions +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. P. R.

Requested Person

Parchetul de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie - Direcţia Naţională Anticorupţie - Serviciul Teritorial Braşov

Prosecuting Authority

Curtea de Apel Braşov

Issuing Judicial Authority

Government of Romania

Intervener

Ireland

Intervener

Government of France

Intervener

Government of Malta

Intervener

European Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Reference / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal of surrender by one executing authority binds others
  2. 2 Impact of irregularities in judge's oath on fair trial rights
  3. 3 Effect of Interpol CCF decision on EAW execution

Ratio Decidendi

An executing authority is not bound to refuse surrender solely because another Member State has refused; it must conduct its own assessment, taking into account previous refusals and underlying reasons. Irregularities in judge's oath only justify refusal if they create a real risk of violation of fair trial rights. Decisions by Interpol CCF or other bodies may be considered but are not determinative. Issuing authorities are not obliged to refer to CJEU unless their decision is final and unappealable. Detention conditions must meet EU standards, and authorities must allow for information exchange before refusal.

Court Disposition

Questions answered; preliminary reference resolved

Orders

  • Executing authorities are not automatically bound by previous refusals; must conduct independent assessment.
  • Issuing authority may maintain EAW if proportional and no real risk of rights violation exists.