Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Damages for the Infringement of Human Rights – The Czech Republic

  • Chapter
Damages for Violations of Human Rights

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 9))

  • 941 Accesses

Abstract

The regime of liability for the violations of human rights is an important additional means of strengthening the protection of human rights in the Czech Republic. Despite the incorporation of human rights treaties into the internal legal order and the acceptance of jurisdiction of international control bodies, in particular the European Court of Human Rights, Czech law does not establish a special regime of liability focused on compensation for human rights violations. Nevertheless, Czech law allows for compensation of both material and non-material harm caused by the infringement of human rights. The legal regulation stems from the domestic legal tradition but it also responds to challenges arising from international law of human rights. The regime of compensation is based on civil liability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Act No. 82/1998 Coll., of 17 March 1998, as amended by later laws.

  2. 2.

    Cf. Jehlička et al (1999, 1188–1189).

  3. 3.

    Decision of the Supreme Court, R 35/1977, pp. 175–176.

  4. 4.

    Občanský zákoník (Civil Code), Act No. 89/2012 Coll.

  5. 5.

    Listina základních práv a svobod, vyhlášená pod č. 2/1993 Sb. (promulgated under No. 2/1993 Coll.).

  6. 6.

    According to Article 112 of the Constitution (Constitutional Act No. 1/1993 Coll., as amended by later acts), “the constitutional order of the Czech Republic consists of the Constitution, the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, constitutional acts adopted under the present Constitution, constitutional acts of the National Assembly of Czechoslovak Republic, the Federal Assembly of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and the Czech National Council regulating state borders of the Czech Republic, and constitutional acts of the Czech National Council adopted after 6 June 1992.”

  7. 7.

    Act No. 160/2006 Coll.

  8. 8.

    See e.g. Hartman c. République tchèque, arrêt du 10 juillet 2003, p. 12, § 66.

  9. 9.

    Decision of the Constitutional Court No. 128/1999, Collection of decisions of CC, vol. 15.

  10. 10.

    See Sec. 2 and 62 ff., Act No. 358/1992 Coll., on Notaries and their acts.

  11. 11.

    See Sec. 38 of the Civil Procedure Code.

  12. 12.

    Act No. 120/2001 Coll., on Judicial bailiffs and enforcement acts.

  13. 13.

    Act No. 212/2000 Coll., on Mitigation of Certain Property Injuries caused by Holocaust and on Amendment of other acts.

  14. 14.

    Cf. Act No. 403/1990 Coll., Act No. 87/1991 Coll., Act No. 229/1991 Coll.

  15. 15.

    Act No. 428/2012 Coll. (o majetkovém vyrovnání s církvemi a náboženskými společnostmi).

  16. 16.

    Act No. 240/2000 Coll., on Crisis management and amendment to some laws (Crisis Act).

  17. 17.

    Act No. 221/1999 Coll., on Professional soldiers.

  18. 18.

    The Decision of the Supreme Court of Czechoslovakia, No. 1 Cz 86/90, 30 November 1990.

  19. 19.

    See the decisions of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic No. 25 Cdo 1802/2002, 23 October 2003; No. 25 Cdo 1421/2004, 24 November 2004; No. 25 Cdo 1395/2004, 25 November; and the decision of the District Court in Svitavy, No. 9 C 583/98, 9 November 1998.

  20. 20.

    Act No. 160/2006 Coll., amending the Act No. 82/1998 Coll., and several other acts.

  21. 21.

    See Kmec (2006, 12 ff).

  22. 22.

    See e.g. Hartman v. the Czech Republic, judgment, 10 July 2003, p. 12, § 66.

  23. 23.

    Parlament České republiky, Vládní návrh 1117 – Důvodová zpráva, 2005.

  24. 24.

    In the Decision No. 30 Cdo 1436/2013, of 4 September 2013, the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic stipulated that anxious depressive mental states resulting from excessive length of judicial proceedings could be qualified either as a damage to health (mental illness) or as a non-material damage (intensive mental troubles).

  25. 25.

    Act No. 89/2012 Coll., Civil Code.

  26. 26.

    See Švestka et al. (2014, 1100–1102).

  27. 27.

    See Jehlička et al. (2004, 580).

  28. 28.

    Section 442 para. 1 of the (Old) Civil Code and Section 2952 of the (New) Civil Code.

  29. 29.

    See Decision of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic, No. 30 Cdo 3394/2010, 26 January 2011.

  30. 30.

    See, for instance, Kuhn (2007), http://jinepravo.blogspot.com, 23 October 2007. Accessed 3 Dec 2013; Vlasák (2010), https://www.law.muni.cz/sborniky/cofola2010/files/sankce/Vlasak_Michal.pdf. Accessed 1 March 2015; Janeček (2013, 989–1012).

  31. 31.

    See Švestka et al. (2014, 1103–1104).

  32. 32.

    See Section 441 of the (Old) Civil Code and Section 2918 of the (New) Civil Code.

  33. 33.

    Decision by the Municipal Court in Prague, No. 51 Co 304/2003, 7 November 2003 (relating to the liability of the Czech Pharmaceutic Chamber).

  34. 34.

    See Section 244 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Act No. 99/1963 Coll.).

  35. 35.

    See Winterová (2008, 22).

  36. 36.

    Promulgated under No. 209 /1992 Coll.

  37. 37.

    Promlugated under No. 120/1976 Coll.

  38. 38.

    General Comment No. 31 [80]: The Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13 (2004), para. 16.

  39. 39.

    Act No. 160/2006 Coll.

  40. 40.

    See e.g. Hartman c. République tchèque, arrêt du 10 juillet 2003, p. 12, § 66.

  41. 41.

    See Vokurka v. Czech Republic, decision of 16 October 2007.

  42. 42.

    See Bako v. Slovak Republic, judgment of 15 March 2005.

References

  • Janeček, Václav. 2013. Sankční náhrada škody. Právník 152(10): 989–1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehlička, Oldřich, Jiří Švestka, and Marta Škárová. 1999. Občanský zákoník komentář [Civil code commentary], 5th ed. Praha: C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jehlička, Oldřich, Jiří Švestka, Marta Škárová, et al. 2004. Občanský zákoník, komentář. Praha: C. H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kmec, Jiří. 2006. K výši zadostiučinění za nemajetkovou újmu způsobenou nepřiměřenou délkou řízení. Právní zpravodaj 8: 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kühn, Zdeněk. 2007. Má mít náhrada škody v soukromém právu sankční funkci? http://www.jinepravo.blogspot.com/2007/10/m-mt-nhrada-kody-v-soukromm-prvu-sankn.html. Accessed 3 Dec 2013.

  • Švestka, Jiří, Jan Dvořák, and Josef Fiala. 2014. Občanský zákoník. Komentář [new Civil Code. Commentary], vol. VI. Praha: Wolters Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlasák, Michal. 2010. Vybrané otázky sankční náhrady škody. In COFOLA 2010: The conference proceedings, 1st ed. Brno: Masaryk University. https://www.law.muni.cz/sborniky/cofola2010/files/sankce/Vlasak_Michal.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2015.

  • Winterová,Alena. 2008. Hromadné žaloby (procesualistický pohled) [Group Actions. A view of procedural law]. Bulletin advokacie 10: 21–27.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Charles University in Prague, nám. Curieových 7, CZ-11640, Praha, Czech Republic

    Pavel Šturma & Veronika Bílková

Authors
  1. Pavel Šturma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Veronika Bílková
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pavel Šturma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Law, Gdańsk University, Gdańsk, Poland

    Ewa Bagińska

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Šturma, P., Bílková, V. (2016). Damages for the Infringement of Human Rights – The Czech Republic. In: Bagińska, E. (eds) Damages for Violations of Human Rights. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18950-5_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation