In the course of the current rulings on data retention, the EU Court of Justice (C-339/20 and C-397/20) has ruled in a further case on a certain handling in France. What appears on the surface to be a pure data retention issue turns out, on closer inspection, to be a potentially landmark decision for the German criminal justice system.
Money on entry into Germany: There is a duty to declare cash (and equivalent means of payment) when crossing the German border. If you enter or leave Germany outside the EU with cash totaling 10,000 euros or more, you must, in accordance with Article 3 of REGULATION (EC) No. 1889/2005, declare this amount in writing to the competent German customs office upon entry or exit without being asked to do so:
Any natural person entering or leaving the Community carrying cash of EUR 10 000 or more shall declare that amount in accordance with this Regulation to the competent authorities of the Member State through which he enters or leaves the Community. The obligation to declare is not fulfilled if the information provided is incorrect or incomplete.Artikel 3 der VERORDNUNG (EG) Nr. 1889/2005
In the case of cash, a written notification is required upon entry into Germany; in the case of equivalent means of payment with a total value of 10,000 euros or more these must be notified verbally upon questioning during customs checks. Violations are punished with a fine, which can be considerable. But also at the internal border, i.e. when traveling within the EU, an obligation to report may arise upon questioning!
Lawyer for German arrest warrant – arrest warrant in Germany, what to do? What can a criminal defense lawyer or lawyer in Germany do in case of an arrest warrant? It is possible that you have suddenly learned that there is an arrest warrant against you in Germany, then the obvious question is how to deal with it. We will help you if you are affected by a German arrest warrant and also advise that you seek advice immediately and in no case also commit foolish acts.
An often underestimated problem is the so-called pseudo self-employment: It can happen that someone is self-employed “on paper” and also behaves like this in everyday life. However, case law and the social security funds in Germany can come to the conclusion that an employment relationship is to be assumed despite self-employment. Objective criteria are used for this – and if the apparently self-employed person is then actually classified as an employee, this has unpleasant consequences: Social security contributions must be paid in arrears, which in Germany can quickly run into six figures! In addition, there is the threat of criminal liability for the involuntary employer and suddenly a monthly remuneration obligation if one does not give proper notice.
When does pseudo self-employment exist? The Federal Social Court (B 12 R 7/15 R) had the opportunity to comment on the criteria for the assumption of pseudo self-employment. Especially in the area of IT law and the widespread use of freelancers here, this is a constant minefield. At the time, the court had ruled that it is a weighty indication of self-employment if the agreed fee is significantly higher than the salary of a comparably employed employee subject to social security contributions and thus allows for self-provision. On this occasion, the court also once again discussed the criteria to be used in the examination of a pseudo-self-employment.
The violation of sanctions (“embargo violation”) is punishable by considerable sanctions – and especially in the past months it is by no means such an exotic violation that one should not have it on one’s radar. In recent months, our law firm has been confronted mainly with requests for advice in the area of software and technology goods, where the question of import or export arises via quite tricky detours.
On the run, what to do? International arrest warrant, European arrest warrant, extradition, Interpol, Red Notice – these are the keywords that run through your head when you are stuck abroad and a German public prosecutor is looking for you. At least formally, you are “on the run” at this moment, although we know that this situation can also arise without having been deliberately brought about by you. It is then many nights on the Internet searched and long lived in uncertainty; sometimes under the worst conditions – because the countries that do not extradite rarely have pleasant living conditions.
We know what we are talking about, our clients come from Lebanon, Turkey, North Africa or Syria, among other countries – and our work in the field of cybercrime, drugs and Encrochat is closely linked to the issues of extradition custody.
Fraud: In Germany, fraud is neither one of the most serious offenses in German criminal law nor one of the most lenient, but is within the normal range with a corresponding expectation of punishment. Depending on the form in which it is committed, it is certainly associated with serious consequences, which can also increase rapidly.Fraud: In Germany, fraud is neither one of the most serious offenses in German criminal law nor one of the most lenient, but is within the normal range with a corresponding expectation of punishment. Depending on the form in which it is committed, it is certainly associated with serious consequences, which can also increase rapidly.
Especially in our border region of Aachen, there is a particularity that criminal defense lawyers have to deal with: The criminal liability of the actions of EU foreigners – and how to deal with this in ongoing criminal proceedings. Without profound knowledge of the so-called EU criminal law and the particularities of cross-border dealings, it is easy to make mistakes in giving advice. Since I now have an increasing client base based in the Netherlands, a few brief words on this.
Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU imposes an obligation on a court dealing with an extradition request to investigate ex officio in two steps whether there is a concrete risk that the person to be transferred will be exposed to the risk of inhuman or degrading treatment after the transfer (see BVerfG, Order of 27.01.2022 – 2 BvR 1214/21; BVerfG, Order of 14.01.2021 – 2 BvR 1285/20).
Since the entry into force of the European Arrest Warrant Act (EuHbG) of July 20, 2006 (Federal Law Gazette I p. 1721) on August 2, 2006, extradition to a Member State of the European Union pursuant to Section 1 (4), 78 IRG has been governed by Sections 80 et seq. of the IRG. IRG, which implemented Council Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA of June 13, 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (OJ No. L 190 of July 18, 2002 p. I – RbEuHb).