Kotanak (Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Presumption of innocence - - Judgment) [2026] EUECJ C-748/24 (30 April 2026)

Kotanak (Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in criminal matters - Presumption of innocence - - Judgment) [2026] EUECJ C-748/24 (30 April 2026)

Article 3, Article 4(1), and Article 6(1) of Directive 2016/343, read with Article 48 of the Charter, do not preclude an appellate court from making detailed factual and legal assessments at a preliminary stage, even without the accused's input, provided the reasoning does not reflect an opinion of guilt. If appellate rulings are incompatible with the presumption of innocence, the first instance court must disregard them, even if national law requires compliance, but may still follow procedural measures ordered by the appellate court.

Citation
[2026] EUECJ C-748/24
Parties
Accused: AC; Prosecutor: Okresná prokuratúra Bratislava III (Bratislava III District Prosecutor's Office); Appellate Court: Krajský súd v Bratislave (Regional Court, Bratislava); Referring Court: Mestský súd Bratislava I (Bratislava I City Court)
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
30 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Ruling (reference for Interpretation of EU Law)
Outcome
Reference answered; partial inadmissibility (recusal of appellate judges); guidance provided to national court.
Legal Topics
Presumption of Innocence, Right to Fair Trial, Effectiveness and Primacy of EU Law, Judicial Reasoning, Criminal Procedure, Remedies for Breach of Rights
Criminal Law European Union Law Human Rights Law Presumption of Innocence Right to Fair Trial Effectiveness and Primacy of EU Law Judicial Reasoning Criminal Procedure +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AC

Accused

Okresná prokuratúra Bratislava III (Bratislava III District Prosecutor's Office)

Prosecutor

Krajský súd v Bratislave (Regional Court, Bratislava)

Appellate Court

Mestský súd Bratislava I (Bratislava I City Court)

Referring Court

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Ruling (reference for Interpretation of EU Law)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 4(1) and Article 6(1) of Directive 2016/343, read with Article 48 of the Charter, preclude an appellate court from making detailed factual and legal assessments implying guilt before trial and without the accused's input.
  2. 2 Whether a first instance court must disregard appellate rulings incompatible with the presumption of innocence, even if national law requires compliance.

Ratio Decidendi

Article 3, Article 4(1), and Article 6(1) of Directive 2016/343, read with Article 48 of the Charter, do not preclude an appellate court from making detailed factual and legal assessments at a preliminary stage, even without the accused's input, provided the reasoning does not reflect an opinion of guilt. If appellate rulings are incompatible with the presumption of innocence, the first instance court must disregard them, even if national law requires compliance, but may still follow procedural measures ordered by the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; partial inadmissibility (recusal of appellate judges); guidance provided to national court.

Orders

  • Article 3, Article 4(1), and Article 6(1) of Directive 2016/343, read with Article 48 of the Charter, do not preclude detailed factual and legal assessment by an appellate court at a preliminary stage, provided no opinion of guilt is expressed.
  • A first instance court must disregard appellate rulings incompatible with the presumption of innocence, even if national law requires compliance, but may follow procedural measures ordered by the appellate court.