Ten judgments concerning cases involving the Czech Republic were delivered by the European Court of Human Rights in 2023. The judgments cover various legal issues, including family law, property rights, fair trial, and the right to life. Additionally, two of the judgments were selected as of particular importance.

In 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) passed ten judgments in cases regarding the Czech Republic. Four cases pertained to family law. In the case of Pejřilová v. the Czech Republic, the Senate of the Fifth Section of the Court (the Senate) unanimously ruled that there was no violation of Article 8 of the Convention which guarantees the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8). This decision stemmed from the denial of the complainant's request for artificial insemination after her husband's death.

Another case, X v. the Czech Republic, was a revision of the former judgment from May 2022. The former Fifth Section of the Court unanimously concluded that Article 8 had not been violated in proceedings related to returning the complainant's daughter to the United States of America. In the case Jírová and others v. the Czech Republic, the Senate ruled that the domestic court’s decision to restrict contact between foster parents and the child did not breach Article 8. In both judgments, ECtHR emphasized the child’s best interests and compelling evidence against the complainant’s claims.

Lastly, in the case of P. N. v. the Czech Republic, the Senate concluded that there was no violation of Article 8 either. This decision pertained to a situation where the complainant's former spouse relocated with their children to the United States without the complainant initiating proceedings for their return under the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Subsequently, the mother obtained a court order replacing the complainant's consent regarding the children's relocation.

Mixed outcomes

In both Pařízek v. the Czech Republic and Kubát and others v. the Czech Republic, the ECtHR unanimously ruled in favor of the Czech Republic. In Pařízek, the court upheld the retroactive payment of deregulated rent, finding it compliant with Protocol No. 1, while in Kubát, it found no violation of the right to a fair trial or the right to property enjoyment regarding state interventions in judicial salaries. Additionally, both cases saw unanimous dismissal of objections related to discrimination under Article 14 of the Convention.

However, in Janáček v. the Czech Republic, the Senate unanimously found a violation - namely of the right to a fair trial under Article 6 due to the failure to provide requested written opinions from ordinary courts. Similarly, in V v. the Czech Republic, the Senate ruled a violation of the right to life under Article 2, linked to a patient's death in a psychiatric clinic following police taser use and hospital medication administration and also due to errors in the investigation of the incident.

Two judgments were selected as of particular importance (also referred to as key cases), both ruled by the Grand Chamber of the Court (the Chamber) on 1. 6. 2023 - Fu Quan s.r.o. v. the Czech Republic and Grosam v. the Czech Republic. The Grand Chamber's decisions replaced those of the First Section of the Court, emphasizing the importance of correctly formulating complaint grounds in both domestic and Court proceedings.

Fu Quan s.r.o. v. the Czech Republic

In the first one, Fu Quan, s.r.o. v. the Czech Republic, a business company's assets were seized during criminal proceedings against its partners, who were later acquitted. The company sought compensation, but its lawsuit was dismissed for lack of legal standing. 

The Chamber initially found a violation of property rights and awarded compensation since the seizure of assets in criminal proceedings against business partners was inadmissible. 

The Chamber also addressed alleged violations of access to court and property rights, finding the complaint unfounded under Article 6 due to lack of legal argumentation and noting the need for exhausting domestic remedies for compensation under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1.

Grosam v. the Czech Republic

In Grosam v. the Czech Republic, the Chamber unanimously ruled on the inadmissibility of a complaint regarding disciplinary proceedings against a judicial executor. The complainant contended that these proceedings violated the right to an independent and impartial tribunal as outlined in Article 6 of the Convention. However, the Chamber found the complaint inadmissible, primarily due to its failure to adhere to the six-month time limit and other procedural shortcomings.

In its ruling, the Chamber also addressed the procedural requirements for formulating complaint objections both within domestic proceedings and before the ECtHR. Additionally, the Chamber clarified the extent of a review conducted by the Chamber and outlined the criteria for determining the admissibility of complaint objections.

In conclusion, the Chamber's ruling not only affirmed the importance of procedural adherence but also provided valuable insights into the criteria governing the admissibility of complaints brought before the ECtHR.

 

Sources

Fu Quan s.r.o. v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 24827/14, 1 June 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-225209 

Grosam v. the Czech Republic [GC], no. 19750/13, 1 June 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-217806 

Janáček v. the Czech Republic, no. 9634/17, 2 May 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-222790 

Jírová and others v. the Czech Republic, no. 66015/17, 13 July 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-224084 

Kancelář vládního zmocněnce (2023). 

Kubát and others v. the Czech Republic, no. 61721/19, 5496/20, 21318/20 et. al., 22 June 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=002-14122 

P. N. v. the Czech Republic, no. 44684/14, 8 September 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-225410 

Pařízek v. the Czech Republic, no. 76286/14, 22 May 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-222137 

Pejřilová v. the Czech Republic, no. 14889/18, 8 March 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-221266 

V v. the Czech Republic, no. 26074/18, 7 December 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=002-14257 

Zpravodaj KVZ. 2023, roč. 11, č. 2. Kancelář vládního zmocněnce, p. 30-33, 38-41, available at: https://justice.cz/documents/12681/720430/Zpravodaj+KVZ+2_2023_fin_.pdf/63bce6d5-d81b-41f6-831d-ebd88c7b6a5c

X v. the Czech Republic, no. 64886/19, 30 June 2023, available at: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre?i=001-223719 

Photo

Key cases highlight procedural adherence and criteria for complaint admissibility. File Folder with Documents (23909830671).jpg, author: Tony Webster, 21 December 2015, source: Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0