|
|
The article reviews the procedural capacity of the victim in criminal procedure. Various features of the damages caused as a result of the act on the basis of which criminal proceedings are initiated, and their implementation, have been analysed. The debatable issues have been discussed regarding the hypothesis under which damages are lucrum cessans, and also in regard to the requirement for damages to constitute an element of the crime, acknowledged by some court panels, and the statements have been substantiated, according to which the capacity of a victim also applies to a person who has suffered damages in the form of lucrum cessans, or who has suffered damages which do not constitute an element of the crime. The inheritance of the procedural capacity of the victim has been studied. A thesis has been supported that in certain hypotheses there is a difference between the procedural capacity for participation as a victim, respectively as a private prosecutor and a civil claimant – physical person, in publicly actionable criminal cases, and as a private complainant.
|
