Do Article 82 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, if appropriate Article 91(1)(c) of that Treaty, and the measures adopted on the basis of the provisions mentioned and the Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, allow the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions or the European Union law measures to improve road safety to not be applied to a decision on the imposition of a financial penalty arising from a road traffic offence according to the discretion of the Member State — the Member State having provided in a legislative act that the requirements of being able to challenge a decision ...[+++] before a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters and the applicability of the procedural rules of national law on appeals in the event of being charged for committing a criminal offence are be disregarded — where at the same time the following applies to the decision in the circumstances of the main proceedings:

Do Article 82 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, if appropriate Article 91(1)(c) of that Treaty, and the measures adopted on the basis of the provisions mentioned and the Council Framework Decision 2005/214/JHA of 24 February 2005 on the application of the principle of mutual recognition to financial penalties, allow the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions or the measures to improve road safety to not be applied to a decision on the imposition of a financial penalty arising from a road traffic offence which is capable of being characterised as ‘minor’ in European Union law in the circumstances in the main proceedings because the Member State has provided that the requirements of being abl ...[+++]e to challenge a decision before a court having jurisdiction in particular in criminal matters and the applicability of the procedural rules of national law on appeals in the event of being charged for committing a criminal offence are to be disregarded.

32 While it is true that it cannot be denied that the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance might, under Article 45 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, treat the provision by a Community institution of incorrect information on the rules for the pursuit of legal remedies as equivalent to unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure with the consequence that no right of the parties concerned should be prejudiced by the expiry of a time-limit, that does not apply in these proceedings.

These mechanisms should result in improved access to justice, while ensuring appropriate procedural guarantees to avoid abusive litigation.

The Action Plan of the Council and the Commission on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice (2) and the conclusions of the Tampere European Council of 15 and 16 October 1999, and in particular point 48 thereof, call for proposals for legislation to combat environmental crime, in particular common penalties and comparable procedural guarantees.

1. An appeal may be brought before the Court of Justice against decisions of the Boards of Appeal on the terms and conditions laid down in Article 230 of the Treaty.