← Back to Case Law
🇮🇹 Italy → 🇦🇹 Austria
2 cases foundBilateral Information
Applicable Treaties
European Arrest Warrant - Law no. 69/2005 - Provisions to bring domestic law into conformity with Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States.
Surrender to Austria set aside: principle of speciality required Croatia’s consent for further surrender
✕
Summary
The case concerned a European Arrest Warrant issued by Austria for the prosecution of a Bosnian national for participation in a theft allegedly committed in Austria in 2021. The Court of Appeal of Milan ordered surrender to the Austrian judicial authority. The requested person challenged the decision, arguing that surrender should have been refused because the offence had allegedly been committed partly in Italy, that the EAW lacked sufficient factual detail and indication of the applicable penalty, and that surrender to Austria would breach the rule of speciality because he had previously been surrendered to Italy by Croatia under a separate EAW concerning prison escape. The Italian Supreme Court held that the first two complaints were inadmissible, since the Court of Appeal had found that all statutory requirements were met, that the offence was committed in Austria, that it carried a five-year custodial penalty, and that the EAW contained a sufficient description of the conduct. However, the Court found the speciality complaint well-founded. The requested person had been surrendered by Croatia to Italy on the basis of an Italian EAW, and the Austrian EAW concerned an offence committed before that surrender. As a result, further surrender from Italy to Austria could be ordered only in compliance with the rule of speciality, including prior consent from Croatia, unless one of the statutory exceptions applied. Since the Court of Appeal had not verified whether Croatian consent had been obtained or whether an exception to speciality was applicable, the Supreme Court annulled the surrender decision and remanded the case to a different section of the Court of Appeal of Milan for a new assessment on that point.
25/06/2026 · Italian Supreme Court · 23759/2026
🇮🇹Italy → 🇦🇹Austria
Reversal and remandExtraditionEAW and procedural preclusion arising from a prior revocation
✕
Summary
From the judgment under appeal it appears that the surrender request of the Austrian judicial authority concerns the same facts, in their historical dimension, as those underlying the previous extradition request submitted by the same authority against the same person. It is unclear whether the renewed surrender request is based on new or different elements compared to those relating to the earlier request already examined by the Italian judicial authority. In such a situation, it is therefore necessary to determine whether the new surrender request is founded on new elements; this assessment must be carried out by the court of merits, which may, where appropriate, also seek additional information and conduct further inquiries from the requesting authority pursuant to Article 16 of Law No. 69/2005.
19/11/2024 · Italian Supreme Court · 42594/2024
🇮🇹Italy → 🇦🇹Austria
Reversal and remandEAW