Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62007CA0404

    Case C-404/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Bíróság, Republic of Hungary) — Criminal proceedings brought by Győrgy Katz against István Roland Sós (Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters — Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA — Standing of victims in criminal proceedings — Private prosecutor in substitution for the public prosecutor — Testimony of the victim as a witness)

    IO C 301, 22.11.2008, p. 11–11 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    22.11.2008   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 301/11


    Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 9 October 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Bíróság, Republic of Hungary) — Criminal proceedings brought by Győrgy Katz against István Roland Sós

    (Case C-404/07) (1)

    (Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA - Standing of victims in criminal proceedings - Private prosecutor in substitution for the public prosecutor - Testimony of the victim as a witness)

    (2008/C 301/20)

    Language of the case: Hungarian

    Referring court

    Fővárosi Bíróság

    Parties in the criminal proceedings

    Győrgy Katz against István Roland Sós

    Re:

    Reference for a preliminary ruling — Fővárosi Bíróság — Interpretation of Articles 2 and 3 of Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings (OJ 2001 L 82, p. 1) — National legislation precluding the possibility of the victim giving evidence in criminal proceedings instituted by the victim as a substitute private prosecutor

    Operative part of the judgment

    Articles 2 and 3 of Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings are to be interpreted as not obliging a national court to permit the victim to be heard as a witness in criminal proceedings instituted by a substitute private prosecution such as that in issue in the main proceedings. However, in the absence of such a possibility, it must be possible for the victim to be permitted to give testimony which can be taken into account as evidence.


    (1)  OJ C 283, 24.11.2007.


    Top