Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence (C-117/20)
Consideration of the questions referred
The idem condition
31

bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence (C-117/20)

Judgment of 22 Mar 2022law://eu/cjeu/2020/c-117-20/para_31@2026-11-12

31As regards the ‘idem’ condition, it follows from the very wording of Article 50 of the Charter that that provision prohibits the same person from being tried or punished in criminal proceedings more than once for the same offence.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Grand Chamber
Case: C-117/20 · ECLI:EU:C:2022:202
Decided: 22 Mar 2022
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Court of Appeal, Brussels, Belgium)
Applicant: bpost SA
Defendant: Autorité belge de la concurrence
Interveners: Publimail SA; European Commission
Rapporteur: K. Jürimäe
Advocate General: M. Bobek
Bench: 13 judges
K. Lenaerts, L. Bay Larsen, A. Arabadjiev, K. Jürimäe, C. Lycourgos, E. Regan, N. Jääskinen, I. Ziemele, J. Passer, M. Ilešič, T. von Danwitz, A. Kumin, N. Wahl
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62020CJ0117

Topics

Charter of Fundamental Rights Competition

History · 1 version

22 Mar 2022Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016)2 provisions
Cited by 18: Criminal proceedings against GR and Others (C-726/21); Criminal proceedings against HF (C-435/22 PPU); Engie România SA v Autoritatea Naţională de Reglementare în Domeniul Energiei (C-205/23)2 provisions; Criminal proceedings against NR (C-58/22); NK v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Feldkirch (C-55/22)2 provisions; Volkswagen Group Italia SpA and Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (C-27/22)2 provisions; M v Lietuvos bankas (C-671/23); Vivendi SE v European Commission (T-1097/23); Lagardère SA v European Commission (T-1119/23); ,,Nekilnojamojo turto valdymas“ BUAB v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos (C-544/24); Dranken Van Eetvelde NV v Belgische Staat (C-331/23); PV v European Commission (T-89/20); 'Vinal' AD v Direktor na Agentsia 'Mitnitsi' (C-820/21); MV - 98 v Nachalnik na otdel & (C-97/21); T.A.C. v Agenția Națională de Integritate (ANI) (C-40/21); Criminal proceedings against MR (C-365/21)2 provisions; Dual Prod SRL v Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Cluj-Napoca - Comisia regională pentru autorizarea operatorilor de produse supuse accizelor armonizate (C-412/21); Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde v Nordzucker AG and Others (C-151/20)2 provisions
Cites 15: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (consolidated 2016)3 provisions; Vincenzo Manfredi v Lloyd Adriatico Assicurazioni SpA, Antonio Cannito v Fondiaria Sai SpA and Nicolò Tricarico and Pasqualina Murgolo v Assitalia SpA (C-295/04, C-296/04, C-297/04, C-298/04); Garlsson Real Estate SA and Others v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob) (C-537/16); Enzo Di Puma v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob) and Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob) v Antonio Zecca (C-596/16, C-597/16); Łukasz Marcin Bonda (C-489/10); Limburgse Vinyl Maatschappij NV (LVM), DSM NV and DSM Kunststoffen BV, Montedison SpA, Elf Atochem SA, Degussa AG, Enichem SpA, Wacker-Chemie GmbH and Hoechst AG and Imperial Chemical Industries plc (ICI) v Commission of the European Communities (C-238/99 P, C-244/99 P, C-245/99 P, C-247/99 P, C-250/99 P, C-251/99 P, C-252/99 P, C-254/99 P); Criminal proceedings against Luca Menci (C-524/15); Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service; Konkurrensverket v TeliaSonera Sverige AB (C-52/09); M (C-398/12); Zoran Spasic (C-129/14 PPU); Toshiba Corporation and Others v Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (C-17/10); bpost SA v Institut belge des services postaux et des télécommunications (IBPT) (C-340/13); bpost SA v Autorité belge de la concurrence (C-117/20)