Our website uses  cookies for statistical purposes.

  • Nové sady 988/2, 602 00 Brno, Czech Republic
  • clients(at)czech-lawyers.com
  • +420 721 565 868
Our Articles

Recognition of an EU Court Decision in Czech Republic

Recognition of an EU Court Decision in Czech Republic

The Czech Republic is a member of the European Union since 2004 and, due to the fact that Czech is also a Member State of the Hague Convention (including the Apostil Convention and bilateral agreements with some other states member of the EU), the decisions of The European Court are easily implemented. 

The primary mission of the European Court of is to ensure that in the interpretation and application of the Treaties. Among its powers are legal disputes between Member States of the Union and the Member States of the EU bodies and structures, and between individuals and the Union. In addition, the judges of the courts of the nation states can address ECJ cases where they have ties with Community law judge.

Court of Justice is composed of 27 judges and 8 general advocates, appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States after consultation with a committee whose role is to give an opinion on candidates’ suitability to perform those functions. They have a term of six years and may be re-elected.

Advocates General assist the Court and their role is to present the findings in the cases assigned to them.

The methods to appeal to the ECJ are through the preliminary proceedings, which allows national courts of justice to ask the ECJ for interpretation of Community law issues they need to take decisions in their cases, and through direct petitions.

In the Czech Republic the regulation issued by the European Court are incorporated automatically into the Czech law and do not require implementation of specific measures.

In the Czech Republic the International treaties and Conventions come in front of the Czech national law.

The main procedures are:

– Preliminary ruling: the Court gives an interpretation of Union law or rule on its validity, and not to apply that law to the facts of the main proceedings, this being the national court’s role. Court has no jurisdiction to rule on issues of fact raised in the main proceedings or to resolve differences of opinion in the interpretation or application of rules of national law.

– Action for failure: failure to comply may result in legal instruments (laws, decrees, administrative decisions) or the result of actions (administrative practices).

Failure can be the result of positive behaviors (actions) or negative (abstentions and omissions). Such actions may include, for example, the adoption of a text contrary to European law or intentionally refusing to repeal a measure the contrary. Abstentions or omissions may relate, for example, the delays in the transposition of a directive or failure by Member States to the Commission of national measures implementing.

Act must be attributable to the Member State. Therefore, the notion of state is interpreted broadly by the Court, to the extent that it may be all its organs such as government, parliament, federal or local entities substantial level etc.

– action for annulment is a judicial proceeding brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This action allows the Court to review the legality of acts adopted by the institutions, bodies or European bodies. The Court annulled the act in question when it considers that it is not in line with European law.

Action for annulment may be exercised by the European institutions or by legal entities under certain conditions.

– action for failure to act may be brought against the European Parliament, the European Council, Commission and European Central Bank. It can also be directed against the bodies and bodies.

In addition, failure to act is characterized by the absence or failure to act by the entity in question in situations where European law imposes an obligation to act. Lack or failure is, therefore, an illegal character.

For example, the action for failure to act may be brought against an institution that supposedly has not adopted an act or measure undertaken under the European law.