Background
EZ was convicted in Bulgaria of driving with a blood alcohol level of 3.23 per mille. He received a one-year suspended custodial sentence, a fine, and a driving ban. Bulgarian law also required the court to address confiscation of the vehicle used in the offence or, if the offender did not own it, payment of its equivalent value.
The vehicle was jointly owned in equal shares by EZ and his wife, who had not participated in the confiscation proceedings because Bulgarian law did not provide for her participation. The Bulgarian court asked whether Framework Decision 2005/212, Directive 2024/1260, and the EU Charter applied, and, if so, whether compulsory confiscation was proportionate and whether the co-owner was entitled to participate and be heard.
The Court’s Holding
The Court held that Framework Decision 2005/212 does not apply to a traffic offence consisting of driving under the influence of alcohol, even when that offence is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. Read in context and in light of its purpose and legislative history, the framework decision concerns offences associated with organised crime or other serious crime potentially having a cross-border dimension. The drunk-driving offence at issue did not fall within that scope.
Directive 2024/1260 was also inapplicable ratione temporis. Although it had entered into force before EZ committed the offence, the offence occurred before the directive’s 23 November 2026 transposition deadline, and Bulgaria had not yet transposed it. Because the confiscation was therefore not governed by the cited EU rules, the Charter did not apply, and the Court did not answer the questions concerning instrumentalities, proportionality, or the co-owner’s procedural rights.
Key Takeaways
- The imprisonment threshold in Article 2(1) of Framework Decision 2005/212 does not by itself bring every qualifying offence within the instrument’s scope.
- Framework Decision 2005/212 did not govern the drunk-driving offence in this case because it was not part of organised crime or another serious crime area potentially having a cross-border dimension.
- The Court did not decide whether Directive 2024/1260 substantively covers such offences or whether the Bulgarian confiscation rule complied with the Charter.
Why It Matters
The judgment limits reliance on Framework Decision 2005/212 as an EU-law basis for confiscation connected with an ordinary traffic offence. National courts cannot treat the decision’s reference to offences punishable by more than one year of imprisonment as a standalone test detached from the measure’s context and objectives.
The ruling is deliberately narrow. It leaves unresolved how Directive 2024/1260 may apply after its transposition deadline and whether national rules requiring confiscation in drunk-driving cases satisfy proportionality and third-party procedural protections under otherwise applicable law.