strafsachen.at
DE EN BKS
Menü
Appeals

Complaint against court orders under section 87 StPO: legal remedy in the investigation

The complaint against court orders under section 87 StPO in Austria: time limit, procedure, typical applications and distinction from the objection for unlawful.

Your personal attorney

Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt

Your lawyer for criminal defence

Criminal proceedings are a matter of trust. One lawyer who walks with you from the first consultation through to the trial, everything from one hand.

Call directly +43 660 2407152 WhatsApp Send email
Book consultation
3 July 2026 · Mag. Christopher Angerer, Rechtsanwalt

In the investigation phase of Austrian criminal proceedings numerous orders are issued by the court. Against these the ordinary remedy of complaint under section 87 StPO is available. The complaint must be filed within 14 days and is decided by the higher regional court.

This post explains from a legal perspective the requirements and typical applications of the complaint under section 87 StPO as well as the distinction from the objection for unlawful exercise under section 106 StPO with regard to prosecutorial measures. This is general information, not advice in an individual case.

Which order is to be challenged?

Four constellations, one clear next step.

Whether pre-trial detention, seizure, search or imminent expiry of the time limit: choose the constellation that applies to you.

Already know you want to send an enquiry? Go straight to the contact form.

01 Question 1

Which court order is to be challenged with the complaint under section 87 StPO?

The complaint under section 87 StPO is directed against court orders in the investigation. Choose the order that affects you.

All paths at a glance

Overview of all answers.

01

Order on pre-trial detention: a swift and careful complaint.

An order on pre-trial detention is to be challenged with the complaint under section 87 StPO within 14 days. From a legal perspective the complaint must be carefully reasoned and must address the grounds of detention specifically. The proportionality of the detention and any less restrictive measures are also relevant.

The complaint against the detention order does not normally have suspensive effect. The higher regional court decides on the complaint. A parallel detention hearing can also play a role depending on the proceedings.

In depth: typical applications →
02

Seizure of assets: target scope and legal basis.

A seizure order can be challenged with the complaint under section 87 StPO within 14 days. From a legal perspective it is worth attacking the reasoning and especially the scope. Often not all assets are necessary for a possible confiscation.

The proportionality of the measure and the question of providing security instead of seizure can also be part of the complaint. A carefully argued complaint can reduce the scope of the block or achieve the release of individual items.

In depth: typical applications →
03

Search: examine the order and the execution separately.

A search warrant is ordered by the court and can be challenged with the complaint under section 87 StPO. In addition the execution itself, that is the concrete conduct of the search, must be assessed separately. From a legal perspective the complaint should target both the order and its conditions.

Even where the search has already been carried out, the complaint can be important. It can have the unlawfulness established and thereby open the way to the question of admissibility of the evidence obtained.

In depth: distinction from section 106 StPO →
04

Imminent expiry of the time limit: act quickly and completely.

The 14-day time limit for the complaint under section 87 StPO is a final time limit. From a legal perspective immediate access to the file is recommended and a complaint should be filed to preserve the time limit, with the reasoning added later. Anyone who misses the time limit loses the remedy.

Even with tight time limits a careful reasoning is worthwhile. A poorly reasoned complaint has limited prospects of success. The defence should therefore file to preserve the time limit and draft the reasoning in parallel.

In depth: time limit and procedure →

Time limit and procedure of the complaint

Section 87 StPO governs the complaint against court orders in the investigation. The time limit is 14 days from service of the order. This time limit is a final one and cannot be extended. Anyone who misses it loses the remedy; restitution is available only in narrow exceptional cases.

The complaint must be filed with the court that issued the order. The higher regional court decides on the complaint. Suspensive effect does not attach to the complaint in most cases, in particular not for pre-trial detention or seizure. An exceptional suspensive effect can be granted by the appellate court in the individual case.

From a legal perspective filing within the time limit is the most important step. The reasoning can be submitted later but should be done carefully so that the complaint has prospects of success.

Typical applications

The complaint under section 87 StPO is available against numerous court orders in the investigation. Particularly frequent are orders on pre-trial detention and its extension as well as on the seizure of assets. Search warrants and orders on certain investigative measures can also be challenged.

For pre-trial detention, in addition to the complaint under section 87 StPO the detention hearing itself is often relevant. The defence can use both paths in parallel and address grounds of detention, proportionality and less restrictive measures in the reasoning.

For seizure the complaint is often directed at the scope. Frequently it is not the ground of the measure but its extension to specific assets that is in dispute. The defence can achieve a reduction without removing the measure entirely.

Distinction from the objection for unlawful exercise (section 106 StPO)

The complaint under section 87 StPO is directed against court orders. In addition there is the objection for unlawful exercise under section 106 StPO. This concerns measures and orders of the prosecutor and of the criminal police. The objection is therefore not a remedy against court orders but a separate remedy against executive acts.

From a legal perspective the correct choice of remedy is decisive. A complaint against a prosecutorial measure is inadmissible, as is an objection against a court order. A wrong choice can lead to missed time limits and to the loss of legal protection.

In composite situations, such as a search with a court order and concrete execution by the criminal police, both remedies may be necessary in parallel.

Time limit and choice of remedy. The complaint under section 87 StPO must be filed within 14 days and is available only against court orders. For prosecutorial measures the objection under section 106 StPO applies. A careful assessment of the legal nature of the challenged act is the basis of any complaint.

Frequently asked questions

What you need to know about the complaint under section 87 StPO.

What can be challenged with the complaint under section 87 StPO? +

Court orders in the investigation. These include in particular orders on pre-trial detention, seizure and search.

What time limit applies? +

14 days from service of the order. The time limit is a final one and cannot be extended.

Does the complaint have suspensive effect? +

Not as a rule. In particular for pre-trial detention and seizure the complaint does not have suspensive effect. The appellate court can grant it in an individual case.

Who decides on the complaint? +

The higher regional court. The complaint is filed with the court that issued the order; that court submits the complaint to the higher regional court.

What is the difference from the objection under section 106 StPO? +

The complaint under section 87 StPO is directed against court orders. The objection under section 106 StPO is available against measures and orders of the prosecutor and of the criminal police.

Is a complaint worthwhile after the search has taken place? +

Yes. Even where the measure has already been executed, the complaint can have the unlawfulness established and thereby affect the admissibility of the evidence obtained.

Related topics

You might also be interested in

Pre-trial detention in criminal proceedings

Requirements, duration and defence against pre-trial detention.

Search in Austria

Procedure, rights and defence in case of a search.

Topics
complaintsection 87 StPOinvestigationpre-trial detentionseizuresearch

Interview, house search, indictment?

In criminal matters every hour counts. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day, earlier in urgent cases.

+43 660 2407152 [email protected]
Contact

A direct line to the firm.

Address

BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg