Inadmissibility of reference on whether unlawful deprivation of liberty may be implicitly deduced from an acquittal under Article 539(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure

The High Court of Cassation and Justice rejected as inadmissible the reference submitted by the Court of Appeal, leaving the lower court's jurisdiction to determine the merits, thereby denying the challenging party relief on the procedural issue. The dispute centered on whether the Court of Appeal could refer a legal question to the High Court regarding the interpretation of criminal procedural law, specifically whether unlawful deprivation of liberty for the purpose of civil indemnification must be explicitly stated in judicial acts or if it can be implicitly deduced from a final acquittal under Article 539(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The decisive legal basis for the rejection was the procedural admissibility requirements for references to the High Court, leading to a ruling that the submission did not meet the statutory criteria for a preliminary decision on a question of law.