Dzivev and Others (VAT - Protection of the European Union's financial interests - Judgment) [2019] EUECJ C-310/16 (17 January 2019)

Dzivev and Others (VAT - Protection of the European Union's financial interests - Judgment) [2019] EUECJ C-310/16 (17 January 2019)

EU law does not preclude a national court from applying a national provision that excludes, from a prosecution, evidence such as the interception of telecommunications requiring prior judicial authorisation, where that authorisation was given by a court that lacked jurisdiction, even if that evidence alone is capable of proving the offences in question. The exclusion of such evidence is consistent with the requirements of the Charter and the rule of law.

Citation
[2019] EUECJ C-310/16
Parties
Defendant: Petar Dzivev; Defendant: Galina Angelova; Defendant: Georgi Dimov; Defendant: Milko Velkov; Related Entity: Karoli Kepital EOOD
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
17 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (criminal Proceedings) / Reference for Preliminary Ruling From National Court
Outcome
Reference answered; EU law does not preclude exclusion of evidence obtained by a court lacking jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
VAT Fraud, Protection of EU Financial Interests, Admissibility of Evidence, Jurisdiction of Courts, Fundamental Rights, Interception of Telecommunications
European Union Law Criminal Law Constitutional Law VAT Fraud Protection of EU Financial Interests Admissibility of Evidence Jurisdiction of Courts Fundamental Rights +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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Petar Dzivev

Defendant

Galina Angelova

Defendant

Georgi Dimov

Defendant

Milko Velkov

Defendant

Karoli Kepital EOOD

Related Entity

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (criminal Proceedings) / Reference for Preliminary Ruling From National Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether EU law precludes national rules excluding evidence obtained by interception of telecommunications authorised by a court lacking jurisdiction in VAT fraud prosecutions

Ratio Decidendi

EU law does not preclude a national court from applying a national provision that excludes, from a prosecution, evidence such as the interception of telecommunications requiring prior judicial authorisation, where that authorisation was given by a court that lacked jurisdiction, even if that evidence alone is capable of proving the offences in question. The exclusion of such evidence is consistent with the requirements of the Charter and the rule of law.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; EU law does not preclude exclusion of evidence obtained by a court lacking jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Article 325(1) TFEU, Article 1(1)(b) and Article 2(1) of the PFI Convention, read in conjunction with the Charter, do not preclude a national court from excluding evidence obtained by interception of telecommunications authorised by a court lacking jurisdiction, even if such evidence is crucial to proving the offence.