Varna: The limitation period for EU fraud passed a fresh test at the Court of Justice on 15 October 2026, when judges in Luxembourg ruled that an absolute 15-year time limit is compatible with EU law, unless it creates a systemic risk that serious fraud goes unpunished.
The judgment in Case C-321/25, known as Gidzhinov, came from the Third Chamber on a reference from the Sofia City Court. The case involves five Bulgarian defendants indicted in 2015. Two face charges of leading an organised crime group and three of taking part in it, and the group is alleged to have operated from March 2011 to November 2012. Four of the defendants also face charges of VAT fraud through wrongful input-tax deductions, with suspected losses above 4 million euros.
The trial has dragged on. It restarted twice, first after a panel that held 48 hearings between 2015 and 2021 lost its judge when he became a European Delegated Prosecutor. A second panel then held 18 hearings between 2022 and 2025 without taking evidence, and a third panel has since taken over. Bulgarian judges asked whether such delays, combined with the national limitation period for EU fraud, could let the suspects escape punishment.
The Court answered that the conduct predates 6 July 2019, so the PIF Convention governs instead of the later PIF Directive. It still applied the principles from its earlier Taricco and Lin line of case law and read Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as the key test. Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona had advised that 15 years generally gives courts enough time to reach a final judgment across three instances, and the Court agreed. A change of panel in one case, it held, does not prove a systemic risk of impunity.
The second question concerned penalties rather than the limitation period for EU fraud. Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA sets minimum standards against organised crime, so member states may set higher maximum penalties for leading or joining a criminal organisation than for the offences the group commits. Proportionality under Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights still applies. The Court found that Bulgarian ranges of 5 to 15 years for leaders and 3 to 10 years for participants stay within those limits.
For prosecutors and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, the message is practical. A single case that runs out of time does not show a structural failure in the limitation period for EU fraud, and any challenge must demonstrate a pattern. Organised VAT fraud cases may also carry a longer horizon than the underlying tax offences, since the organisation charge can run to about 22.5 years in Bulgaria. Banks and payment firms should expect investigators to seek records long after accounts close. The ruling therefore settles one point firmly: the limitation period for EU fraud can stay at 15 years when national courts show no systemic gap.
