NATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF CROSS-BORDER INSTRUMENTS TO PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL AND/OR PSYCHOSOCIAL DISABILITIES IN LAW AND IN PRACTICE opinion is taken into account when deciding whether to send the judicial act together with the notification. 23 The court informs the person in a language understandable to him/her about the sending of the judicial act together with the notification, using the notification form. The form is submitted to the competent authority of the executing State for the purpose of notifying the person when he/she is on its territory. Case law The search in the electronic case law data base found three court decisions about persons with psychosocial disabilities and about the implementation of the above mentioned provisions which could be relevant to their rights. The first one is for a transfer of a 30-years-old drug abusing Bulgarian man25 under compulsory treatment for offenders with psychosocial disabilities in Austria to Bulgaria. He was convicted in attempted murder of 5 persons while driving a stolen van in September 2019 and was assessed as mentally incompetent. Both the prosecutor and the concerned person’s attorney in Bulgaria expressed an opinion for recognition of the decision of the Austrian court and acceptance for implementation of the compulsory treatment in a regular psychiatric hospital in Bulgaria. The concerned person was not present at the court hearing and did not express an opinion. From the declaration of the person attached to the notification from Austria, it is established that he did not consent to the sending of the court decision and the notification to Bulgaria, stating as reasons for this the poor conditions in the prisons and that he would receive no visitations. The Bulgarian court decided that the man should be placed under compulsory treatment in a regular psychiatric hospital near his place of residence in Bulgaria and that his treatment should be reviewed every six months. The second case is of a transfer to Bulgaria of a 44-years-old Bulgarian man detained in Austria in September 2019 on suspicion of rape and theft. In September 2021 the Bulgarian court26 considered two notifications from Austria for recognition and execution of two sentences of the man. The prosecutor decided to accept the sentences for execution and to deduct the sentence served in Austria for one of them. The convicted man did not appear at the hearing because he was serving a prison sentence in Austria and the case was being heard in his absence, with a public defender being appointed. The latter maintained the position that the sentences should not be recognised by Bulgaria, because they must be served in the country where the crimes were committed. Two Austrian court decisions were considered at the hearing. The first Bulgaria, Transfer of Prisoners Transposing Act, Art. 22, para. 5. Bulgaria, Transfer of Prisoners Transposing Act, Art. 22, para. 6. 25 Decision № 41 of 16 March 2022, on criminal case № 1335/2021 by Regional Court in Varna and Decision No. 609 Hv 5/2019h of the Landesgericht fur Strafsachen, Vienna. 26 Decision 127 of 1.09.2021 by Regional Court in Burgas, Bulgaria. 23 24 16 SLAVKA KUKOVA