CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 novembre 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 12 December 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 16272/21 Josip KLEMM against Croatia lodged on 15 March 2021 communicated on 22 November 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s complaint that he has been tried twice for the same offence. In 2012 the applicant was found guilty and convicted to pay a fine in the amount of 10,000 Croatian kunas (HRK) in administrative tax proceedings for the minor-offence under the Value Added Tax Act of deducting VAT for fictitious services by third companies in 2006 and 2007. In the subsequent criminal proceedings, in respect of which the investigation had started in 2014, on 3 July 2017 the applicant was found guilty and sentenced to one year’s imprisonment for abuse of trust in business dealings and damaging his own company by paying fictitious services to third companies between 2005 and 2007. The applicant complains, under Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention, that he was punished twice for the same offence.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has the applicant been punished twice for the same offence in the territory of the respondent State, as prohibited by Article   4 §   1 of Protocol No.   7 to the Convention (see A and B v. Norway [GC], nos. 24130/11 and 29758/11, §§   101-134, 15   November 2016; Jóhannesson and Others v. Iceland , no.   22007/11, § 53, 18 May 2017; and Milošević v. Croatia , no. 12022/16, §§   27 et seq., 31 August 2021)?