Facts
The appellant [X.] was convicted by the District Court of Zurich for unauthorized access to a data processing system. However, the High Court of the Canton of Zurich discontinued the criminal proceedings against him due to a violation of the principle of accusation. As a result, [X.] was ordered to pay a procedural indemnity for the entire first instance proceedings to the opposing party [A. AG] .
[X.] appealed against this cost regulation to the Federal Supreme Court. He argued that only the opposing party 2 had filed a criminal complaint and was therefore responsible for initiating the proceedings. Furthermore, the allegedly violated personality rights were highly personal rights that could not be asserted by a company.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal. It stated that the appellant's conduct could have been the causal factor for the initiation of the criminal proceedings, as it had raised the suspicion of a criminal offense. However, the adequate causal link between this conduct and the costs of the present criminal proceedings was not given, as only the opposing party 2 had filed a valid criminal complaint.
…