CELEX: 62008CA0344
Language: en
Date: 2009-07-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-344/08: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie — Republic of Poland) — Criminal proceedings against Tomasz Rubach (Protection of species of wild fauna and flora — Species listed in Annex B to Regulation (EC) No 338/97 — Evidence of lawful acquisition of specimens of those species — Burden of proof — Presumption of innocence — Rights of the defence)

12.9.2009   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 220/14
            
         Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 16 July 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie — Republic of Poland) — Criminal proceedings against Tomasz Rubach
   (Case C-344/08) (1)
   
   (Protection of species of wild fauna and flora - Species listed in Annex B to Regulation (EC) No 338/97 - Evidence of lawful acquisition of specimens of those species - Burden of proof - Presumption of innocence - Rights of the defence)
   2009/C 220/22
   Language of the case: Polish
   
      Referring court
   
   Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie
   
      Party involved in the criminal prosecution in the main proceedings
   
   Tomasz Rubach
   
      Re:
   
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Sąd Rejonowy w Kościanie — Interpretation of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (OJ 1997 L 61, p. 1) — Notion of ‘proof’ that specimens of the species listed in Annex B were lawfully acquired
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   Article 8(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein must be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of criminal proceedings brought against a person accused of having infringed that provision, any type of evidence accepted under the procedural law of the Member State concerned in similar proceedings is in principle admissible for the purpose of establishing whether specimens of animal species listed in Annex B to that regulation were lawfully acquired. In the light also of the principle of the presumption of innocence, such a person may adduce any such evidence to prove that those specimens came lawfully into his possession in accordance with the conditions laid down in that provision.
   
      (1)  OJ C 272, 25.10.2008.