CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 juin 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s53A58D73 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } Published on 15 July 2025   THIRD SECTION Applications nos. 20220/19 and 53015/20 Dimitrios DAFTSIOS against Greece and Georgios DIMITRIADIS against Greece lodged on 29 March 2019 and 30 November 2020 respectively communicated on 27 June 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASES The applications concern the domestic courts’ refusal to annul the administrative fines for having infringed customs legislation on smuggling, imposed on the applicants who had been also convicted in criminal proceedings for the offence of smuggling. In particular, the administrative courts held that they were not bound by the criminal conviction under the ne   bis in idem principle, as the criminal sanctions were manifestly excessively low; the administrative fines should have been annulled only if the criminal sanctions were efficient, deterrent and proportionate to the offence (judgment no. 1887/2018 of the Supreme Administrative Court). The applicants complain of a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Have the applicants been tried and punished twice for the same offence as prohibited by Article 4 § 1 of Protocol No. 7? Were the proceedings sufficiently closely connected in substance and time (see A and B v.   Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, §§ 125-34, 15 November 2016, Goulandris and Vardinogianni v. Greece , no. 1735/13, §§ 49-55 and   78-79, 16 June 2022, and Kapetanios and Others v. Greece , nos. 3453/12 and 2 others, §§ 62-75, 30 April 2015)?