van Vemde (Judgment) [2017] EUECJ C-582/15 (25 January 2017)

van Vemde (Judgment) [2017] EUECJ C-582/15 (25 January 2017)

Article 28(2) of Framework Decision 2008/909 must be interpreted strictly and covers only judgments which became final before the date specified by the Member State; the relevant date is when the judgment became final, not when it was issued.

Citation
[2017] EUECJ C-582/15
Parties
Subject of Proceedings: Mr Gerrit van Vemde; Sentencing Court: Hof van beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal, Antwerp, Belgium); Requested Executing State: Kingdom of the Netherlands; Referring Court: Rechtbank Amsterdam (District Court, Amsterdam, Netherlands)
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
25 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (cjeu) / Judgment on Reference for Preliminary Ruling
Outcome
Preliminary ruling issued; Article 28(2) covers only judgments which became final before the specified date.
Legal Topics
Mutual Recognition of Criminal Judgments, Enforcement of Custodial Sentences, Transitional Provisions, Interpretation of Framework Decision 2008/909/jha
European Union Law Criminal Law Mutual Recognition of Criminal Judgments Enforcement of Custodial Sentences Transitional Provisions Interpretation of Framework Decision 2008/909/jha

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Gerrit van Vemde

Subject of Proceedings

Hof van beroep Antwerpen (Court of Appeal, Antwerp, Belgium)

Sentencing Court

Kingdom of the Netherlands

Requested Executing State

Rechtbank Amsterdam (District Court, Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Referring Court

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (cjeu) / Judgment on Reference for Preliminary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 28(2) of Framework Decision 2008/909 covers judgments issued before or only those which became final before the specified date

Ratio Decidendi

Article 28(2) of Framework Decision 2008/909 must be interpreted strictly and covers only judgments which became final before the date specified by the Member State; the relevant date is when the judgment became final, not when it was issued.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling issued; Article 28(2) covers only judgments which became final before the specified date.

Orders

  • Article 28(2) of Council Framework Decision 2008/909/JHA must be interpreted as meaning that it covers only judgments which became final before the date specified by the Member State concerned.