In The Matter Of The Application For Revocation § 45 Para. 3 Sentences Of The Third Act. 92/1991 Coll.

Original Language Title: ve věci návrhu na zrušení § 45 odst. 3 věty třetí zák. 92/1991 Sb.

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now

Read the untranslated law here: https://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/download?idBiblio=45213&nr=63~2F1997~20Sb.&ft=txt

63/1997.



FIND



The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic



On behalf of the United States



The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic held on 4 December 2002. February 1997 in Parliament in case

the design of regional court in Ostrava on abolition of the provisions of § 45 para. 3

the third sentence of the Act No. 92/1991 Coll., on conditions for the transfer of property to the State of the

other persons, as amended



as follows:



The proposal is rejected.



Justification



(I).



On 20 April. August 1996 the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic received the draft of the regional

Court in Ostrava on abolition of the provisions of § 45 para. 3 third sentence of Act No.

92/1991 Coll., on conditions for the transfer of State assets to other persons, as amended by

amended.



The Senate 15 what the regional court in Ostrava in appeal proceedings in the case, led by

under SP. zn. 15 What 331/94, concluded that the law, which has to be in

the solution of the case used is in conflict with constitutional law, respectively.

the international treaties referred to in article. 10 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic (hereinafter referred to as

"The Constitution"). On the basis of article 87(3)(c). 95 para. 2 of the Constitution and § 64 para. 4 of law No.

182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, therefore, the regional court in Ostrava, resolution

of 28 June. April 1995 SP. zn. 15 What 331/94, which came into force

on 31 December 2007. July 1995, proceedings according to § 109 paragraph. 1 (b). (b)) of the row.

interrupted and presented the case to the Constitutional Court.



I/a



In a case decided by the regional court in Ostrava (SP. zn. 331, 15/94)

Prosecutor r., trade and service company, a public company, in

the appeal sought the annulment of the judgment of the District Court in Karviná, Czechoslovakia of 23 December 2003.

March 1994, SP. zn. 29 (C) 250/93, by which the applicant's proposal was rejected on the

imposing an obligation on the defendant of o., a. s., to allow the undisturbed applicants

the use of the warehouse and asset based agreement of 7 November 2002. October 1991, after

the duration of this agreement (i.e., the date of 31 December 2001). The applicant in the

the proceedings before the General Courts argued the fact that up to the effectiveness of the

Act No. 210/1993 Coll., which was amended by law No. 92/1991 Coll.,

was not limited in any way how the conclusion of contracts for the lease of property and

non-residential premises. According to his opinion, the literal interpretation of the provisions of § 45

paragraph. 3 third sentence of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended

(including Act No. 210/1993 Coll.), would mean accepting retroactive,

which would be a contradiction with the Constitution.



The contract on the lease of non-residential premises and property closed with the legal

the predecessor of the respondent, s. p., therefore the applicant considered it a valid

regardless of that, there has been a transformation of the State enterprise, in which

the warehouse, which is the lease concerned, out of the assets

the nature of this business, and then excluded the national property fund enclosed

the joint-stock company of the Defendant, by contrast, the literal wording of the section 45

paragraph. 3 third sentence of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended,

the most stringent measures.



I/b



In conformity with the legal opinion of the Court of first instance and the District Court in Ostrava

in the present case considers the core issue of determining whether the lease

based agreement of 7 November 2002. October 1991 has lapsed as a result of the amendment

No. 92/1991 Coll., made by law no 210/1993 Coll., on 1 January 2000. October 1993

(i.e. the date on which the exemption effectively part of the assets in question-

the warehouse, whose use of the rental agreement concerned-from the State Enterprise).



The regional court in Ostrava, in its proposal, notes that at the time when

the plaintiff entered into a contract with the State enterprise in question, Act No.

92/1991 SB. any restrictive provisions concerning the possibility of State

businesses lease assets natural or legal persons did not have.

Points out in addition to the fact that it explicitly with this issue to

the amendment of the Act, Act No. 92/1992 Coll., effective from 28. February 1992,

that from the date of its effectiveness limited the possibility of State-owned enterprises to enter into

a lease agreement on the use of property on which exercise the right

management, and for the period up to the date of transition to the

Fund. Recapping the development of legislation, the regional court in Ostrava, quotes

Furthermore, the new wording § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended by Act No.

544/1992 Coll., which with effect from 18. December 1992 was released

28 date. February 1992, from which the previous adjustment was limited referred to

disposition of permission state enterprises. Finally, in its proposal, quotes and

the wording of that provision, according to the amendment of Act No. 92/1991 Coll. made

Act No. 210/1993 Coll. (with effect from 13 August 1993)

expressly provides for the extinguishment of the right to use the assets of the former State-owned enterprises

arising from contracts concluded before 28 February. February 1992. For completeness, in

the proposal states that the diction § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended by

Act No. 210/1993 Coll., haven't changed anything other amendments made by the law No.

308/1993 Coll. and no 224/1994 Coll.



The regional court in Ostrava, is of the opinion that the provisions of § 45 para. 3

Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended by Act No. 210/1993 Coll., is retroactive

nature, if according to your last sentence extend into the right to use the asset

arising from contracts concluded before 28 February. February 1992. Draws attention to the

the fact that it is an interference with property rights (the right to use

contractually-based assets) at a time when the conclusion of tenancy agreements to

property to the State for a longer period was acting legally permissible. With

a link to the article. 1 of the Constitution, and in the alternative, on the finding of the Constitutional Court of the

24 May 1994 (No. 131/1994 Coll.) considers the regional court in Ostrava

the contested provisions conflicting with one of the fundamental principles

the rule of law, the principle of legal certainty.



The proposal further distinguishes between two cases of retroactive effects of § 45

paragraph. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended. The first is the

the situation, when the rental ratio pursuant to that provision of the law No.

92/1991 Coll., as amended by Act No. 210/1993 Coll., has lapsed before the acquisition

the effectiveness of Act No. 210/1993 Coll. (i.e. before 13 August 1993), the second then

the situation, when the demise of the rented ratio occurred after that time (how to

in the case of rozhodovaném the general courts). In both cases, the

According to the opinion of the regional court in Ostrava retroaktivnímu occurs

the action of the contested legal provisions.



Having regard to the reasoning contained in the Constitutional Court of 22 March.

March 1994 (No. 86/1994 Coll.), the regional court in Ostrava, considers that

the retroactive effect of § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended by

amended, does not justify even a voucher for a public interest or public

good. In his view, similar to the retroactive interference could be materially

justified in removing the inequalities arising from the relationships established in the

time limited contractual freedom of the parties and the law-based inequalities

subjects entering into contractual relations. "Undoing" of the law,

adopted by the democratically elected Parliament, made up after a rather

a long time of its efficacy in the knowledge that this was already the third

an attempt to address the issue of long-term leases of property, as defined in § 1 of the law

No. 92/1991 Coll., the design is therefore considered inadmissible violation

the principle of legal certainty.



The regional court in Ostrava on in terms of the principle of the protection of the citizens ' confidence in the

the law draws attention to the fact that legal entities acting in good

faith, are affected by the retroactive editing and economically, because the

the prospect of long term use of the leased asset may have a higher

economic value than the value of the agreed rent. In the opinion of

the applicant would be a retroactive legislative intervention can be justified

only by providing appropriate compensation to the affected tenants.



II.



According to § 42 para. 3 and section 69 of Act No. 182/1993 Coll. posted by Constitutional Court

proposal from the Chamber of Deputies. The President of the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament

The Czech Republic-Ing. Milos Zeman confirmed, in accordance with the requirements of

contained in the provisions of § 68 para. 2 Act No. 182/1993 Coll., Act

No 210/1993 Coll. was approved by the required majority of the members of the

the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the United Kingdom on 8 June 1998. July 1993, signed by the

respective constitutional factors and properly declared. Expressed the belief of the

compliance of the contested provisions with constitutional laws and international

the contracts referred to in article. 10 of the Constitution.



Further pointed out that the adoption of Act No. 210/1993.

responded to the various difficulties encountered in the practical implementation

the large privatization, and is due to the non-traditional solution to the problem

the transition of property to the State to the private realm, to understand that the legislature

He could not remember all the pitfalls that this process will be

follow. According to the observations of the President of the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the

for this reason, the legislature "failed to take the restrictive measures in respect of

options for State-owned enterprises lease assets natural or legal

persons ", but" as soon as he became aware of this fact, has taken the form of

several amendments to Act No. 92/1991 Coll., the corresponding legislation

trying to deal with this situation, and he had to respond to the

the fact that until the entry into force of these amendments of the State-owned enterprises

such a lease contract concluded ". For the reason that the legislative

procedure in its opinion it considers the fact that without the resolution of the

problem, the process of privatisation of State enterprises a very complicate things.



In the observations is further included the belief that the contested legal


provisions does not have retroactive effect, and therefore does not interfere with the rights arising

28. February 1992, when the only new way regulates the legal relations

with effect for the future. Its legal effects can therefore be

characterized only as non-genuine, with retroactive effect to the provisions of

the legislation, which have such a character, do not conflict with

the principles of the rule of law.



III.



Act No. 92/1991 Coll., which entered into force on 1 January 2000. April 1991, the range of

disposition of permission state enterprises concerning entering into lease

contracts for the use of assets to which they have pursued the right management, not

did not limit.



The amendment of the act carried out by Act No. 92/1992 (with effect

from 28 January 2002. February 1992) the provisions of § 45 para. 3 docked on the

the given issues the following adjustment:



"(3) firms can enter into a lease contract and other contracts on the use of

the assets referred to in section 1 of the other persons only for the period up to the date of transition

of the assets of the relevant Fund. If the contract were after the date

February 28, 1992, closed for a longer period, the right to use the asset on the date of

his transition to the appropriate Fund. "



Act No. 542/1992 Coll., which was law No. 92/1991 Coll. again

amended, with effect from 8 March 2004. December 1992, established the new wording

§ 45 para. 3:



"(3) firms can enter into a lease contract and other contracts on the use of

the assets referred to in section 1 of the other persons only for the period up to the date of transition

of the assets of the relevant Fund. If the said contracts were

closed for a longer period, the right to use the asset on the date of its transition

to the appropriate Fund. "



Finally, the other, in the order in the third, the amendment to Act No. 92/1991 Coll.

made by law No. 210/1993 Coll. has changed with effect from 13 June 2005. August

1993 the provisions of § 45 para. 3 in the following wording:



"(3) firms can enter into a lease contract and other contracts on the use of

the assets referred to in section 1 of the other persons only for the period up to the date of cancellation

the company without liquidation or exclusion of part of the assets of an undertaking pursuant to § 11

paragraph. 1. should the above contracts were concluded for a period longer,

the right to use the assets on the date of cancellation of an undertaking without liquidation or the date of

exclusion of part of the assets of an undertaking; This does not apply in the case of a contract for the hire of

non-residential premises, on the conclusion of a right under a special

Regulation 13) and about the contract on the lease of flats. To this day shall cease to exist and the right of

use the assets resulting from the agreements concluded before 28 February. February 1992. "



[Note # 13) refers to article 15 of law no 428/1990 Coll., on

transfers of State ownership to some of the things on the other legal or

natural persons, as amended.]



Referred to form of the provisions of § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll. was not

without prejudice to the law No 308/1993 Coll. and no 224/1994 Coll., Act No. 92/1991

Coll. changing and complement, and therefore represents the current diction section 45 para.

3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended.



IV.



IV/a



To the basic principles of defining a category of law include

the principle of the protection of the citizens ' confidence in the law and the related principle of

non-retroactivity of laws.



Legal theory and practice is while the difference between right and wrong

retroaktivitou, and is generally accepted definition of this fundamental

legal doctrine.



In a series of definitions in an authoritative definition can be considered as E. Tilsche, which

the right and the wrong definition of retroactive effect as follows: "the right backward

the action of the New Testament is there only when the Act for a period of

last ... False reverse action ... that is, when a new law

dictates that it should be used even on the old legal relations already based, but

only from the time when the scope of the new law begins, or from the time even

later. " (E. Tilsch, civil law. General part, Prague, 1925, p. 75-

78.)



The right; then "involves basically two different situations",

First, the "State that the new legislation gave the emergence (new law) relationships before

its efficiency under conditions which afterwards established ", and for the

the second amendment can alter the legal relationships arising under the old legal

editing, and even before the effect of the new law ". (Still, for the time

the scope of the amendment to the civil code, a lawyer, No 12, 1984, p. 1104).



For the retroactive effect therefore, lex posterior cancels (does not recognize)

legal effects in time of the effectiveness of legislation, where appropriate, the prioris raises or

brings together the rights and obligations of subjects with such facts, which at the time of

the effectiveness of the legal rationale behind the prioris not facts.



In the case of retroactive false: "the new law, although does not constitute legal

the consequences for the past, but a past fact for either elevates

a condition of future legal effect (simple exclusivity), or

modifies for the future legal consequences under the former laws

based ... False reverse the action of the law only indicates that a new law

captures (legally qualifies) past facts or that touches the

(modifies, repeals) the existing legal consequences, i.e.. on the factual

the essence of založivší is bound to the future of other rights and other obligations

than the existing legislation. It is therefore about the intervention of the new law on the one hand

in the foregoing, and to the so-called. rights acquired. " (And.

Walk; the laws. In: Dictionary of public law. Vol. III,

Brno in 1934, p. 800.)



In General, time conflicts of old and new legal standards apply

false, i.e.; from the effectiveness of the new legal standards and legal

relations arising under the repealed legislation governed by the new law.

The emergence of the legal relationships existing before the entry into force of the new legal

standards, legal claims that have arisen out of these relationships, as well as done

legal acts shall be governed by the repealed law (a consequence of the opposite

the interpretation of conflict of law rules would be right;).

Apply here the principle of protection of past legal facts, in particular

legal venue.



IV/b



The principle of the protection of the citizens ' confidence in the right shows that the principle of

of non-retroactivity cannot be related to exposure to

legal norms, which do not constitute intervention in the legal security, respectively.

acquired rights. An example of such reaction is a situation in which

assuming different adjustment at the time of committing the criminal offence

and at the time of deciding on which the deed shall be assessed according to the law, which is

for the more favourable the offender (article 40 paragraph 6, second sentence of the Charter of fundamental

rights and freedoms).



In the context of the analysis of the retroactive principle is further necessary to deal

the question of possible exceptions of non-retroactivity of laws,

standards. It is necessary to distinguish between the right and the inadmissibility of the assessment

false-retroactivity.



The general policy is retroactive right of inadmissibility, from which

There are strictly limited exception of admissibility for retroactive false

on the contrary, the general principle of admissibility apply, from which there are exceptions to the

inadmissibility.



Right the retroactive effect "can be ospravedlniti at most, where legal

the obligation for the past laid down previously at least as moral

obligation is felt ". (A. walk,; laws. In:

A dictionary of public law. Vol. III, Brno, 1934, p. 800.) Reasonably have been

in this connection, about the time the scope of the Statute of the international military

the Tribunal at Nuremberg concluded: "if it is backward force of the law,

then we declare that matches exactly the higher standards of Justice,

that, in practice, all the civilized countries a certain boundaries for

retroactive effect of the law ", and a criterion for the admissibility of

-retroactivity was considered a "sense of Justice, which is to own this

the world and that will be trampled under the feet if they are war criminals after the second

After World War II without penalty ". (Inaugural speech, Chief Prosecutor for the great

Britain Hartleye Shawcross, in: judgment at Nuremberg, part 1., Prague

1953, p. 206.) A similar opinion we are even in the current legal theory:

"In General, from the principle of non-retroactivity may be waived entirely

exceptionally, the explicit positive provisions. As is evident from the

history, the reason for such procedures was the situation when the legal

Security came into conflict with the certainty of a steep social and legal

knowing, as it did in Czechoslovakia in case of retribučních of the decrees. Feedback

the scope of the Act on civil conditions could be justified whether or not

the public policy (ordre public), especially if they were without prejudice to the

absolutely mandatory regulations, which were issued as a result of certain limit

the situation of the transformation of values in society. " (L. Still, op. cit., p. 1102.)



The criterion of admissibility of exceptions to the principle of the prohibition of retroactive right is

the legislative principle of the protection of legitimate confidence in the stability of the rule of law ".

(A. walk, the basics of the intertemporal law, Brno 1928, p. 111). About

the legitimate trust cannot be considered provided when a legal entity

retroactive regulations must, or had to count. An example of such a

the situation is the action of legal norms in stark violation of the Standing

the fundamental principles of humanity, as generally recognised and morals: "in our

the legal procedure we can ospravedlniti a link to the previous ruling moral

beliefs, for example. retroactive effect lichevních laws (see section 13 of Act No.


47/1881., § 10 cís. the CLP regulation. No 275/1914., § 105 (III). Sub New.

to the citizens. Cust.). " (A. walk,; laws. In: Dictionary

public law. Vol. III, Brno, 1934, p. 800.)



IV/c



Prohibition of retroactive legal norms for the field of criminal law is

specifically modified in the article. 40 para. 6 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms,

his work for other sectors of the right should be inferred from the article. 1 of the Constitution.



The issue of retroactivity in its case-law has touched the constitutional

Court of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic in the award SP. zn. Pl. ÚS

78/92 (collection of resolutions and findings of the TC, 1992, no. 16) and the Constitutional Court of the Czech

States, in finding SP. zn. IV. TC 215/94 (collection of findings and

the resolution of the TC, 3, 227n).



In the first of the above findings of the Constitutional Court of the Czech and Slovak Federal

The Republic noted that the principles of the rule of law require for each

a possible case of retroactive its explicit representation in the Constitution or in the

the Act in order to exclude the possibility of retroactive interpretations of the law and

at the same time require in law with the associated consequences, retroaktivitou

to the acquired rights are properly protected.



Inadmissibility-retroactivity, or retroaktivního interpretation emphasized in

the latter decision of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic: "To

the characters of law intrinsically belongs to the principle of legal certainty and the

the protection of the citizen's confidence in the law. This includes the prohibition of

-retroactivity of legal rules and their retroaktivního interpretation. "



In the.



In the present case, two questions have to be asked. The first is whether the

the provisions of § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended

regulations, can be described as retroactive and, if so, whether it is a

the retroactive effect right or wrong.



If the answer is a matter of the second constitutional

neakceptovatelnost, respectively, are acceptable to retroactive legislation.



Act No. 92/1992 (with effect from the date of February 28, 1992) in the newly

modified by the provisions of § 45 para. 3 restrict the disposition of State permission

undertakings to conclude a lease contract to the things which from exercising the right to

management. The amendment made by Act No. 542/1992 Coll., that from the wording of

the provisions of § 45 para. 3 reference to the term amendment the previous

deleted, opened the possibility of retroactive interpretation for lease

conditions, which arose prior to the date of 28. February 1992.



Amendment to Act No. 92/1991 Coll., carried out by Act No. 210/1993 Coll. contains

diction, according to which the date of cancellation of an undertaking without liquidation or the date of

exclusion of part of the assets of the undertaking ceases to exist and the right to use the assets arising from the

contracts concluded before 28 February. February 1992 (i.e. before the date of effect

Act No. 92/1992 Coll., that restriction of permission state

undertakings to conclude a lease contract to the things which from exercising the right to

management, introduced).



True retroactivity for the contested provisions would be present only for the

provided, if would cover cases in which the rental ratio was

contracts concluded before 28 February. February 1992, and to the dissolution of the undertaking, without

liquidation or the exclusion of part of the assets of an undertaking has occurred before the acquisition

the effectiveness of Act No. 210/1993 Coll. (i.e. before 13 August 1993), which would

It was expressed and the sunset date of the rental relationship.



It is necessary to distinguish between cases in which the provisions of the legal compliance can be

legislation with the constitutional order to secure his constitutionally Conformal

interpretation and when you cannot do so and it should be ready to

the cancellation. The Court is not absolutely bound by statutory wording

provisions, but it can and must depart, when it

requires serious grounds for the purpose of the Act, the history of its creation,

systematic link or one of the principles that have their basis in the

constitutionally the legal order as a conformal významovém a whole. It is necessary to

in so doing, avoid arbitrariness; the Court's decision must be based on

rational argument.



In the case of § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended

regulations, the compliance with constitutional laws and international treaties

According to the article. 10 of the Constitution to secure interpretation. This means that the

the provisions must be interpreted in the sense that the lease conditions, which

arose from contracts concluded before 28 February. February 1992 of law No. 92/1991

Coll., as amended by Act No. 210/1993 Coll., in case of cancellation of an undertaking without

disposal or removal, part of the assets of the undertaking before 13. in August 1993,

shall cease only after the entry into force of Act No. 210/1993 Coll. (respectively.

their scheme from 8 March 2004. December 1992 to 13 July 2005. August 1993 controls

Act No. 542/1992 Coll., which was law No. 92/1991 Coll.).



There remains the issue of constitutional law, the concept of a false

retroactive § 45 para. 3 of Act No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended

legislation, as a result of its effectiveness after the lex posterior

changed or abolished the legal relations which originated on the basis of the legislative process.

prioris.



The cancellation of the old and the adoption of the new legislation is not necessarily associated with the intervention

the principles of equality and protection of confidence of the citizen in the right. This occurs in

as a result of the protection other public interest or the basic rights and freedoms.

The assessment of this aspect of the conflict of proportionality with regard to the

intertemporalitu should lead to the conclusion about the kind of legislative solutions

time of conflict of laws. Proportionality can be

characterized by a higher degree of intensity of public interest, respectively.

the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms warrants a greater degree of intervention in the

the principles of equality and protection of the right to a new citizen trust legal

regulations. At the same time apply the maximum constraints for injunctive

the basic law, or freedom to save its essence and purpose (article 4

paragraph. 4 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms). When you assess how

the legislative solution therefore plays a role intertemporality not only

a measure of the differences of the new and old rules, but also the social

the urgency of the implementation of the new legislation, etc.



The legislature's decision about how to resolve time conflicts of old and new

the legislation, therefore, from the perspective of Constitutional Affairs is not fortuitous or things

arbitrariness. It is for the consideration of the standing constitutional collision

principles. In this context, the legal theory to address false

retroactive notes that this is "fundamentally admissible; She can but

be inadmissible if it is constitutional, thus affecting confidence in the

offence and the importance of legislative wish for the public

does not exceed or is less than the interest of the individual to the continued existence of

the existing law. " (B. Pieroth, Rückwirkung und Übergangsrecht.

Verfassungsrechtliche intertemporale Massstäbe für gesetzgebung, Berlin

1981, pp. 380-381.)



When assessing the compliance of the contested provisions, which acts with the effects

false-retroactivity, with constitutional laws and international treaties

According to the article. 10 of the Constitution must be considered the intensity of public interest in the

the successful implementation of the "big" privatization (for which the existing leases

reduce the attractiveness of privatized enterprises for purchasers, and thus

the feasibility of privatization) with the degree of interference with the principles of equality and

the protection of the citizen's confidence in the law, i.e. with a degree of protection emanating

tenants of non-residential premises and assets of former State enterprises.



The privatization of State-owned enterprises as part of the economic transformation

centrally controlled Communist economic system to the system

based on the freedom of ownership and a market economy represented and

represents in terms of the fulfillment of the constitutional article. 1 of the Constitution, article. 1, art. 2

paragraph. 1, art. 3 (2). 1, art. 11 (1) 1 of the Charter of fundamental rights and

freedoms. The degree of intensity of public interest to achieve that objective

justifying the acceptance of false in terms of retroactive and specific intervention in the

the principles of equality and protection of confidence of the citizen in the right.



From the perspective of the present case-genuine retroactivity § 45 para. 3 of the law

No. 92/1991 Coll., as amended by Act No. 210/1993 Coll., means that the tenant

non-residential premises or other property to which the right to exercise

the management of State-owned enterprises, had 13. August 1993, be aware that to

date of cancellation of the company without liquidation or exclusion of part of the assets of the undertaking

(or by changing the owner) the rental ratio Closed 28. February 1992

ceases to exist, and could therefore had to, respectively, with this fact into account. A similar

the approach chosen by the legislature, even if the legal implications of restitution,

When in Act No 116/1990 Coll., as amended, between the

the reasons for the termination of the lease of non-residential space, closed for a certain period,

the testimony also release real estate according to the ranks of the restitution law (No.

403/1990 Coll., as amended, no. 229/1991 Coll., as amended by

amended).



Having regard to the foregoing, the Constitutional Court of the regional court in

Ostrava, Czech Republic on abolition of the provisions of § 45 para. 3 third sentence of Act No. 92/1991

Coll., as amended, pursuant to section 70 para. 2 of law No.

182/1993 Coll. rejected.



The President of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic:



JUDr. Kessler v. r.