Question juridique clé
Whether the complaint met the Federal Supreme Court’s reasoning requirement under Art. 42 LTF
Solution extraite
The appeal did not sufficiently address the grounds of the challenged decision and was therefore manifestly inadmissible.
Motifs extraits
The appellant argued mainly the merits of the seizures and new investigative elements, but did not substantively confront the lower court’s reasoning that the prosecutor had no duty to decide while the matter was already pending on appeal and that those elements could still be raised there.