Find EU Case Law

Ivan Gavanozov*

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Spetsializiran nakazatelen sad (Bulgaria) lodged on 31 May 2017.

Questions referred:

1. Are national legislation and case-law consistent with Article 14 of Directive 2014/41/EU regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters, in so far as they preclude a challenge, either directly as an appeal against a court decision or indirectly by means of a separate claim for damages, to the substantive grounds of a court decision issuing a European investigation order for a search on residential and business premises and the seizure of specific items, and allowing examination of a witness?

2. Does Article 14(2) of the directive grant, in an immediate and direct manner, to a concerned party the right to challenge a court decision issuing a European investigation order, even where such a procedural step is not provided for by national law?

3. Is the person against whom a criminal charge was brought, in the light of Article 14(2) in connection with Article 6(1)(a) and Article 1(4) of the directive, a concerned party, within the meaning of Article 14(4), if the measures for collection of evidence are directed at third party?

4. Is the person who occupies the property in which the search and seizure was carried out or the person who is to be examined as a witness a concerned party within the meaning of Article 14(4) in connection with Article 14(2) of the directive?


Case Number C-324/17

Name of the parties Ivan Gavanozov

Date of the judgement 2017-05-31

Court Court of Justice of the EU

Link http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=193481&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=1058729