ECJ (second chamber), judgment of 17.07.2007, Case C-288/05 (J.rgen Kretzinger) () External sources: InfoCuria 1. Article 54 of the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the phasing out of controls at their common borders, signed in Schengen on 19 June 1990, Must be interpreted in the sense that the determining test for the application of this article is the identity of material acts, understood as the existence of a series of facts that are inextricably linked, regardless of the legal classification made to them or the protected legal interest;- acts of receiving foreign contraband tobacco from a contracting state and importing that tobacco into another contracting state and being in possession of it; , which is characterized by the fact that the defendant, being prosecuted in two contracting states, intended from the outset to transport tobacco to a final destination which, after the first takeover, crosses several contracting states, and constitutes conduct likely to fall within the concept of “identical acts” within the meaning of Article 54. It is an extension of the final assessment of the relevant national courts.2. For the purposes of section 54 of the SISA, a conviction by a court in a contracting state was “executed” or “effectively executed” when the defendant was given a conditional sentence.3 For the purposes of section 54 of the SISA, a conviction by a court of a contracting state should not be considered “enforceable” or “effectively enforceable” if the defendant has been remanded in custody and/or remanded in custody for a short period of time and/or remanded in custody until pre-trial detention and that such detention would result in a subsequent execution of the prison sentence in accordance with the law. The fact that a Member State in which a person has been convicted by a final and binding judgment under its national law may issue a European arrest warrant against that person to enforce the sentence provided for in The Framework Decision 2002/584/JAI 13 June 2002 on the European Arrest Warrant and the procedures for handing over between Member States cannot undermine the interpretation of the concept of `implementation` within the meaning of Article 54 of CISA. Judgment of the Court of Justice (2007-07-17), case C-367/05 ( Norma Kraaijenbrink) ( ) External sources: InfoCuria Article 54 of the Schengen Agreement agreement of 14 June 1985 between the governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, Federal Of Germany and the French Republic on the phasing out of controls at their common borders, Signed on 19 June 1990 in Schengen (Luxembourg), it should be interpreted in the sense that:- the determining criterion for the application of this article is the identity of material acts, understood as the existence of a set of facts that are inseparably linked, regardless of the legal classification or legal interest granted to them; – various acts including detaining in a state contracting the proceeds of drug trafficking and drug trafficking and the protection of the law, secondly, in the case of the exchange of sums of money also from that trade, the exchange offices of another contracting State should not be considered as “the same acts” in the sense of art. 54 of the Schengen Agreement only because the competent national court finds that these acts are linked to the same criminal intent;- given the possibility of seeing the degree of identity and the link between all the facts to be established, taking into account the relevant criterion mentioned above, it must be established that these are the “same acts” within the meaning of Article 54 of the Schengen Convention.
The Most Trusted Coverage Service
