{"id":472,"date":"2016-01-31T09:03:38","date_gmt":"2016-01-31T08:03:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/?post_type=publication&#038;p=472"},"modified":"2025-09-10T11:21:15","modified_gmt":"2025-09-10T09:21:15","slug":"de-la-convergence-des-jurisprudences-de-la-cjue-et-de-la-cour-edh-lelaboration-dune-definition-commune-du-princip-ne-bis-in-idem","status":"publish","type":"publication","link":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/publication\/de-la-convergence-des-jurisprudences-de-la-cjue-et-de-la-cour-edh-lelaboration-dune-definition-commune-du-princip-ne-bis-in-idem\/","title":{"rendered":"De la \u00ab convergence \u00bb des jurisprudences de la CJUE et de la Cour EDH : l\u2019\u00e9laboration d\u2019une d\u00e9finition commune du princip ne bis in idem"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Extrait<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">Le principe ne bis in idem, selon laquelle personne ne peut \u00eatre jug\u00e9 ou poursuivi deux fois pour la m\u00eame infraction, a \u00e9t\u00e9 appr\u00e9ci\u00e9 \u00e0 plusieurs reprises par la CJUE et la Cour EDH mais la port\u00e9e du principe variait selon la nature du contentieux, ce principe ayant des implications diff\u00e9rentes selon les ordres juridiques. Les deux juridictions europ\u00e9ennes ont cependant une tendance forte \u00e0 converger vers une d\u00e9finition commune du principe. La Cour EDH recourt \u00e0 la jurisprudence de la CJUE pour d\u00e9terminer le contenu de ce principe dans plusieurs affaires r\u00e9centes, y compris certaines o\u00f9 le droit de l\u2019UE est totalement absent. La CJUE se fonde r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement sur les arr\u00eats de la Cour EDH pour pr\u00e9ciser l\u2019application du principe ne bis in idem en droit de l\u2019Union europ\u00e9enne, notamment pour la qualification p\u00e9nale ou administrative de certaines sanctions. Ainsi les \u00e9l\u00e9ments constitutifs du principe sont pour la plupart compris dans les m\u00eames termes par les deux cours. Cette tendance conna\u00eet son aboutissement dans l\u2019arr\u00eat Kapetanios et autres c. Gr\u00e8ce dans lequel la Cour EDH admet l\u2019unicit\u00e9 de sa jurisprudence avec celle de la CJUE sur le principe ne bis in idem en mati\u00e8res fiscale et p\u00e9nale.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><strong>Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n<p class=\"01bCorpsdetexte\">The ne bis in idem principle provides that no one shall be tried or punished twice for the same offence. This principle was interpreted many times by both ECJ and ECtHR but the scope of the principle depended much on the type of case brought before these courts, with different effects for each legal order. Nonetheless both European courts have a strong tendency to move forward to a common definition of the principle. The ECtHR refers to the ECJ case-law in order to determine the content of the principle in some recent cases, including some with no connection to EU law. The ECJ also refers to the ECtHR case-law to apply the ne bis in idem principle in EU law, especially when it comes to characterise sanctions as either criminal or administrative ones. Therefore the main elements of the principle are mostly interpreted in the same way by both courts. This tendency was achieved with the Kapetanios and Others v. Greece case in which the ECtHR agrees that its case-law must be taken as a whole with the ECJ case-law about applying the ne bis in idem principle for criminal and tax matters.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><em><a title=\"arnaud-lobry.pdf\" href=\"https:\/\/ceje.ch\/files\/8616\/4241\/5886\/arnaud-lobry.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Acc\u00e8s au texte &#8211; Access to full text<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"template":"","publication_tax":[47],"class_list":["post-472","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication_tax-working-paper"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/472","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/472\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":496,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/472\/revisions\/496"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=472"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication_tax","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ceje.meig.ch\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication_tax?post=472"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}