E posibil ca reclamanții să fi căzut victime ale unei interpretări noi ce a fost conferită noțiunii de evaziune fiscală, dar …

3 august 2017
319 citiri

(e)  Conclusion
821. The Court recognises that the applicants’ case had no precedents. However, the Court reiterates that Article 7 of the Convention is not incompatible with judicial law-making and does not outlaw the gradual clarification of the rules of criminal liability through judicial interpretation from case to case, provided that the resultant development is consistent with the essence of the offence and could reasonably be foreseen. The applicants may have fallen victim to a novel interpretation of the concept of “tax evasion”, but it was based on a reasonable interpretation of Articles 198 and 199 and “consistent with the essence of the offence”. The Court concludes that there was no violation of Article 7 on account of the applicants’ conviction under this head.

Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului
(Hotărârea din data de 25 iulie 2013, Khodorkovskiy și Lebedev v. Russia, CE:ECHR:2013:0725JUD001108206)

Lasă un răspuns