In its judgment in Case C-292/23, Fiscalía Europea v I.R.O. and F.J.L.R., the Court of Justice of the European Union held that procedural acts of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) which are capable of producing binding legal effects vis-à-vis third parties must be amenable to judicial review by the competent national courts.
The case arose from an EPPO investigation in Spain into suspected fraud affecting the financial interests of the European Union, in connection with a grant awarded to a Spanish company. In the course of that investigation, a European Delegated Prosecutor ordered that two individuals be summoned as witnesses. The persons under investigation sought to challenge that measure, arguing that it affected their legal and procedural position. Since Spanish law did not clearly provide for a direct remedy against such a measure, the competent national court referred questions for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU.
The CJEU clarified that the notion of acts “intended to produce legal effects vis-à-vis third parties” constitutes an autonomous concept of EU law and must be interpreted in accordance with uniform criteria, irrespective of classifications adopted under national law. Against that background, it held that even a decision of a European Delegated Prosecutor to summon witnesses may fall within the scope of judicial review, provided that it is capable of materially affecting the legal position of the persons against whom the investigation is being conducted.
The Court further emphasised that national law must secure effective judicial protection, even if only by way of incidental review. Moreover, where, in comparable domestic situations, national law permits a direct challenge against analogous measures, the same possibility must equally be available in respect of acts of the EPPO.
The judgment therefore reinforces the rights of the defence and marks a clear limit to national procedural autonomy where the latter results in inadequate protection against acts of the EPPO.
https://sakkoulaslibrary.com/preview/article/25216/
Share this post
Recent Posts

Right to Silence – Grounds for an administrative offense…
Right to Silence – Grounds for an administrative offense – Administrative sanction of criminal nature – Criminal Liability – Privileged information – Market manipulation –

Criminal Law – Molotov cocktail – Elements of incendiary and explosive device…
Criminal Law – Molotov cocktail – Elements of incendiary and explosive device – Manufacture and possession of explosives – 272 PC – Arson The reversal

Torture – Criminal Law – Abuse by an individual – Inhuman behavior…
Torture – Criminal Law – Abuse by an individual – Inhuman behavior – Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) – Fair