Germany Extradition Law — Case Law, Legal Framework and Procedure

Extradition cases involving Germany — Requested and Requesting State

🇩🇪

Germany

Germany Extradition Law & Case Law — 34 cases

6
As requested
state
28
As requesting
state
Case Law
EAW: alleged lack of jurisdiction of the national Public Prosecutor in favour of EPPO (European Public Prosecutor’s Office) is not a ground for refusal of surrender
✕
Summary
In proceedings concerning a European Arrest Warrant issued by Germany for VAT evasion offences, the Supreme Court of Cassation held that the alleged lack of jurisdiction of the ordinary German public prosecutor, in favour of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), does not constitute a ground for refusal of surrender under Italian law. The Court clarified that EPPO competence under Regulation 2017/1939 is concurrent rather than exclusive and that disputes concerning the allocation of investigative powers between EPPO and national prosecuting authorities fall within the legal system of the issuing State and cannot be reviewed by the executing judicial authority. The Court further stated that the executing State may assess procedural violations allegedly committed in the issuing State only where they result in a breach of fundamental constitutional principles or inalienable rights protected under Article 2 of Law No. 69/2005, the TEU, or the ECHR. It also reiterated that, in tax-related European Arrest Warrant proceedings, the requirement of double criminality is mitigated and does not require perfect correspondence between the foreign and domestic offences, nor identical punishment thresholds or sanctioning regimes, provided that the conduct remains criminally punishable under both legal systems.
19/05/2026 · Italian Supreme Court · 18123/2026
🇮🇹Italy → 🇩🇪Germany
GrantedEAW
EAW and refusal ground based on the existence of a criminal proceedings for the same facts
✕
Summary
Where the request for surrender concerns acts committed in part within the territory of the State, the mandatory ground for refusal of surrender arises only where there is not merely a potential interest of the domestic legal system in asserting jurisdiction, but an objective situation—demonstrated by the existence of investigations into the facts underlying the European Arrest Warrant—indicative of the State’s actual intention to exercise its jurisdiction. Accordingly, the ground for refusal applies only insofar as criminal proceedings for the same facts are already pending before the Italian judicial authority.
21/05/2025 · Italian Supreme Court · 19671/2025
🇮🇹Italy → 🇩🇪Germany
GrantedEAW
EAW: postponement of surrender and discretionary assessment of domestic justice needs
✕
Summary
Postponement of surrender: as regards the possibility for the Court of Appeal to order that the surrender of the requested person be postponed in order to allow that person to be subject to criminal proceedings in Italy (or to serve there a sentence imposed for an offence other than that underlying the European Arrest Warrant), the use of the verb “may” (“…the Court may order…”) indicates that any domestic interests of justice—unlike what is provided in extradition proceedings under Article 709 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure—do not mandatorily require the postponement of surrender, but rather call for an assessment of appropriateness by the Court. Accordingly, since this is a merely interim measure, based on a discretionary assessment aimed at satisfying domestic justice needs to which the requested person is subject, it is necessary that—where the Court of Appeal, acting as the executing judicial authority, decides to prioritise domestic justice interests by ordering the postponement of surrender—it must specify the act or event that will bring the need for postponement to an end.
13/11/2024 · Italian Supreme Court · 41957/2024
🇮🇹Italy → 🇩🇪Germany
GrantedEAW
Country Contributor
Sören Schomburg
Knauer Partnerschaft von Rechtsanwälten mbB
Partner at Knauer Partnerschaft von Rechtsanwälten mbB, Sören Schomburg advises national and international clients in the areas of commercial criminal law and tax criminal law, international criminal law, and extradition law. He has extensive experience in complex, frequently transnational internal investigations and with respect to search and seizure, especially raids involving data confiscation.
He defends clients throughout Germany, in Europe and before the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and against INTERPOL.
His longstanding experience and networking in these areas enable him to provide clearly targeted advice and defence strategies to clients. He represents national and international companies and their managers.
He has authored numerous specialist publications on commercial criminal law, on INTERPOL warrants, and on the European Arrest Warrant. In addition, he regularly holds lectures at legal conferences on topics related to international legal assistance in criminal matters and on INTERPOL.
After his studies at Humboldt-Universität in Berlin and King′s College in London, he completed his postgraduate legal clerkship at the German Federal Foreign Office and a law firm in Tokyo, among others, and worked at a leading law firm in the area of commercial criminal law. In 2011, he joined the law firm named Ufer Knauer at the time, where he was appointed partner in 2020.
In 2023, he joined forces with Prof. Christoph Knauer and Dr. Björn Boerger to found the law firm Knauer Partner.
Sören Schomburg advises clients in German, English, Danish, and French.
Need legal assistance?

Extradition proceedings involving Germany

Contact a specialist lawyer with proven experience in extradition cases.

Contact →