The Court of Justice of the European Union handed down, on Monday 24 July, a ruling in which it concluded that national judges are - in principle - obliged to set aside national rules or case law that create a systemic risk of impunity for offences in the fight against fraud against the EU’s financial interests.
The Court of Appeal in Brasov, Romania, referred the case to the CJEU following the appeal lodged by several Romanian nationals sentenced to prison terms for tax fraud, in particular value added tax. They invoked two rulings by the Romanian Constitutional Court in 2018 and 2022, which invalidated a national provision governing the grounds for interrupting the limitation period in criminal cases.
These judgments handed down by the Romanian court did not provide any grounds for interrupting the limitation period. According to convicted persons, this absence of grounds for interruption would constitute more favourable treatment, which they are requesting be applied in order to exclude the interruptive nature of procedural acts carried out before 2018.
The Brasov Court of Appeal also questioned the CJEU as to whether the primacy of EU law precluded - or not - the disciplinary liability of judges in the event that the Brasov Court of Appeal had to leave the case law of the Romanian Constitutional Court unapplied in order to comply with EU law.
In its judgment, the CJEU takes the view that the decisions of the Romanian courts, which led to no grounds for interrupting the limitation period for criminal liability being provided for a period of almost 4 years, give rise to a systemic risk of impunity for the offences in question which is not compatible with the requirements of EU law.
Furthermore, it adds that national courts are obliged to leave national regulations and case law unapplied if they result in criminal liability being time-barred in so many cases of serious fraud affecting the EU’s financial interests.
Finally, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled - on the subject of the disciplinary liability of judges - that by virtue of the principle of primacy of EU law, a preliminary ruling by the Court of Justice is binding on the national court as regards the interpretation of EU law for the resolution of a dispute. The CJEU thus concludes that a court cannot be prevented from applying EU law in accordance with the Court’s decision or case law, if necessary by setting aside national case law that is an obstacle to full effectiveness.
To see the judgment (in French): https://aeur.eu/f/87f (Original version in French by Thomas Mangin)