The French ‘Code de procédure pénale’ provides the possibility to revise final criminal convictions. The Act of 2014 reformed the procedure for revision and introduced some important novelties. The first is that it reduced the different possible grounds for revision to one ground, which it intended to broaden. The remaining ground for revision is the existence of a new fact or an element unknown to the court at the time of the initial proceedings, of such a nature as to establish the convicted person’s innocence or to give rise to doubt about his guilt. The legislature intended judges to no longer require ‘serious doubt’. However, experts question whether judges will comply with this intention of the legislature. The second is the introduction of the possibility for the applicant to ask the public prosecutor to carry out the investigative measures that seem necessary to bring to light a new fact or an unknown element before filing a request for revision. The third is that the Act of 2014 created the ‘Cour de révision et de réexamen’, which is composed of eighteen judges of the different chambers of the ‘Cour de cassation’. This ‘Cour de révision et de réexamen’ is divided into a ‘commission d’instruction’, which acts as a filter and examines the admissibility of the requests for revision, and a ‘formation de jugement’, which decides on the substance of the requests. Practice will have to show whether these novelties indeed improved the accessibility of the revision procedure. |
Search result: 446 articles
Year 2020 xArticle |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Final criminal conviction, revision procedure, grounds for revision, preparatory investigative measures, Cour de révision et de réexamen |
Authors | Katrien Verhesschen and Cyrille Fijnaut |
AbstractAuthor's information |
Article |
|
Journal | Erasmus Law Review, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | criminal proceedings, retrial in favour of the convicted, retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant, Germany, judicial errors |
Authors | Michael Lindemann and Fabienne Lienau |
AbstractAuthor's information |
The article presents the status quo of the law of retrial in Germany and gives an overview of the law and practice of the latter in favour of the convicted and to the disadvantage of the defendant. Particularly, the formal and material prerequisites for a successful petition to retry the criminal case are subject to a detailed presentation and evaluation. Because no official statistics are kept regarding successful retrial processes in Germany, the actual number of judicial errors is primarily the subject of more or less well-founded estimates by legal practitioners and journalists. However, there are a few newer empirical studies devoted to different facets of the subject. These studies will be discussed in this article in order to outline the state of empirical research on the legal reality of the retrial procedure. Against this background, the article will ultimately highlight currently discussed reforms and subject these to a critical evaluation as well. The aim of the recent reform efforts is to add a ground for retrial to the disadvantage of the defendant for cases in which new facts or evidence indicate that the acquitted person was guilty. After detailed discussion, the proposal in question is rejected, inter alia for constitutional reasons. |
Rulings |
ECJ 23 September 2020, Case C-777/18 (Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal (Soins de santé transfrontaliers)), Free Movement, Social InsuranceWO – v – Vas Megyei Kormányhivatal, Hungarian case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Free Movement, Social Insurance |
Abstract |
In principle, healthcare received on initiative of an insured person, in another Member State than the Member State of residence, constitutes ‘scheduled treatment’ within the meaning of Article 20 of Regulation 883/04/EC, the reimbursement of which is subject to prior authorization. This can be different in ‘individual circumstances’. |
Pending Cases |
Case C-426/20, Temporary Agency WorkGD and ES – v – Luso Temp – Empresa de Trabalho Temporário, S. A., reference lodged by the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca de Braga – Juízo do Trabalho de Barcelos (Portugal) on 10 September 2020 |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Temporary Agency Work |
Case Reports |
2020/52 An employer cannot compel an employee, without notice, to take deferred annual leave (FR) |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Paid Leave |
Authors | Claire Toumieux and Susan Ekrami |
AbstractAuthor's information |
|
Pending Cases |
Case C-485/20, Disability DiscriminationX – v – HR Rail, SA de droit public, reference lodged by Conseil d’État (Belgium) on 29 September 2020 |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Disability Discrimination |
Rulings |
ECJ 19 November 2020, Case C-93/19 P (EEAS – v – Hebberecht), Gender Discrimination, MiscellaneousEuropean External Action Service (EEAS) – v – Chantal Hebberecht, EU case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Gender Discrimination, Miscellaneous |
Abstract |
In its consideration of Ms Hebberecht’s request to extend her posting, EEAS could not exclude equal treatment aspects from the consideration on grounds that they were not deemed relevant in the interests of the service. |
Rulings |
ECJ 11 November 2020, Case C-300/19 (Marclean Technologies SLU), Collective RedundanciesUQ – v – Marclean Technologies SLU, Spanish case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Collective Redundancies |
Abstract |
The reference period determining whether a collective dismissal took place, can be any 30-/90-day period in which the largest numbers of relevant dismissals took place. |
Pending Cases |
Case C-344/20, Religious DiscriminationL.F. – v – S.C.R.L., reference lodged by Tribunal du travail francophone de Bruxelles (Belgium) on 27 July 2020 |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Religious Discrimination |
Rulings |
ECJ 8 October 2020, Case C-644/19 (Universitatea „Lucian Blaga” Sibiu and Others), Age Discrimination, Fixed-Term WorkFT – v – Universitatea « Lucian Blaga » Sibiu and Others, Romanian case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Age Discrimination, Fixed-Term Work |
Abstract |
Difference in treatment of teaching staff not found to be age discriminatory, but may be in breach of the fixed-term work directive. |
Pending Cases |
Case C-389/20, Gender DiscriminationCJ – v – Tesorería General de la Seguridad Social, reference lodged by the Juzgado de lo Contencioso-Administrativo n.º 2 de Vigo (Spain) \ on 14 August 2020 |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Gender Discrimination |
Rulings |
ECJ 12 November 2020, Case C-382/19 P (Pethke – v – EUIPO), MiscellaneousRalph Pethke – v – EUIPO, EU Case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Miscellaneous |
Abstract |
Internal disciplinary case, claims rejected. |
Rulings |
ECJ 24 September 2020, Case C-223/19 (YS (Pensions d’entreprise de personnel cadre)), Discrimination General, Gender Discrimination, PensionYS – v – NK AG, Austrian case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Age Discrimination, Gender Discrimination, Pension |
Abstract |
Deductions from pensions larger than a certain threshold do not necessarily constitute gender and/or age discrimination. |
Case Reports |
2020/49 Employing the former employees of a former service provider represents transfer of undertakings (RO) |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Transfer of Undertakings |
Authors | Andreea Suciu and Teodora Manaila |
AbstractAuthor's information |
|
Pending Cases |
Case C-411/20, Free Movement, Social InsuranceS – v – Familienkasse Niedersachsen-Bremen der Bundesagentur für Arbeit, reference lodged by the Finanzgericht Bremen (Germany) on 2 September 2020 |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Free Movement, Social Insurance |
Case Reports |
2020/50 Transfer-related contractual changes void even if beneficial for employees (UK) |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Transfer of Undertakings, Employment Terms |
Authors | Lisa Dafydd |
AbstractAuthor's information |
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has ruled that the provision under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) which renders changes to employees’ terms and conditions void if they are made because of the transfer applies to changes that are advantageous as well as detrimental to employees. On the facts of the case, this meant that owner-directors who had made significant improvements to their own employment terms before a TUPE transfer could not enforce these against the transferee employer. |
Rulings |
ECJ 6 October 2020, Case C-181/19 (Job Center Krefeld), Social InsuranceJobcenter Krefeld – Widerspruchsstelle – v – NK AG, Austrian case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Social Insurance |
Abstract |
Regulation 492/2011 precludes legislation based on which a Member State denies a citizen from another EU member state his social benefits when his children still go to school in the (first) Member State. Unfortunately, no English translation is available yet. |
Editorial |
One size fits all? |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Rulings |
ECJ 1 December 2020, Case C-815/18 (Federatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging), Applicable Law, Posting of Workers and ExpatriatesFederatie Nederlandse Vakbeweging – v – Van den Bosch Transporten BV, Van den Bosch Transporte GmbH, Silo-Tank Kft, Dutch case |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Applicable Law, Posting of Workers and Expatriates |
Abstract |
Posting of Workers: Directive 96/71/EC applies to the road transport sector. A worker is posted if his/her work has a sufficient connection with the host country.The ECJ’s summary of the case is available on: https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/p1_3345527/en/ |
Case Reports |
2020/47 The Danish Supreme Court decides on reversed burden of proof (DK) |
Journal | European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020 |
Keywords | Gender Discrimination |
Authors | Christian K. Clasen |
AbstractAuthor's information |
The Danish Supreme Court recently held that an employer had discharged the reversed burden of proof in a case concerning a physiotherapist who was dismissed shortly after her return from maternity leave. |