The Constitutional Court
On behalf of the Republic of
The Constitutional Court ruled under SP. zn. PL. ÚS 31/09 on 9 April. January 1, 2013 in plenary
consisting of Chairman Paul Rychetského and Stanislav Bumpkin,
Vlasta Formánkové, Pavla Holländera, Ivana Janů, Vladimir Crust,
Jiří Mucha, Jan Musil (Judge-Rapporteur), Jiří Nykodýma,
Miloslav Excellent and Michaela Židlické on the draft regional court in Brno
the repeal of the provisions of Article XXIV, paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
the public budget stabilization, as amended, with the participation of
1. the regional court in Brno, 2. The Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament
States and 3. Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, as participants
The proposal is rejected.
Recap of the proposal
1. In the proposal, delivered to the Constitutional Court on 12 October. 10.2009, the regional court of
Brno, under the provisions of § 64 para. 3 of Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the constitutional
the Court, in the wording of later regulations (hereinafter referred to as the "law on the Constitutional Court")
and in accordance with article 95 para. 2 of the Constitution of the United States proposed the abolition of
the provisions of Article XXIV, paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
the public budget stabilization, as amended by later regulations (hereinafter referred to as
"the Act No. 261/2007 Coll."). For the regional court in Brno handed design
the single judge of the regional court. Jarmila Ďásková.
2. The present proposal has been filed in connection with the management, led by u
Regional Court in Brno under the SP. zn. 57 Ca 14/2009 of the administrative lawsuit
the applicant Mgr. l. s. z. (hereinafter referred to as "the applicant") against the defendant
The regional authority of South Moravian region, the Department of Social Affairs. Action
is challenged by the decision of the regional office from day 1. 12.2008 No. JMK
155130/2008, SP. zn. S-JMK 51819/2008/OSV-Pr, which was rejected
the applicant's appeal against the decision of the Labour Office Brno-město, Department of
State social support of 17 May. 4.2008 No. 1388/8/BME/3, by which the
was granted State social support-parental allowance in
the amount of 7600.0-per month from 1 July 2002. 1.2008.
3. The applicants challenged the decision of the defendant of the regional office from day 1.
12.2008 in a situation in which her as mother of the minor daughter H. S., was
meted out parental benefit pursuant to the provisions of § 30 paragraph 2. 1 (b). (b)),
(a). d) of Act No. 117/1995 Coll., on State social assistance, as amended by
amended (hereinafter "Law No 117/1995 Sb.). The assessment of the
This entitlement to parental benefit pursuant to the revised version of the law
No. 117/1995 Coll. is a consequence of the wording of Article XXIV, points 4 and 5 of law No.
4. The new legislation of the right to parental benefit, and the determination of its amount
in accordance with Article XXIV, points 4 and 5 of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll. is, in the opinion
the applicants in relation to the recipients of parental allowance to the already born
children in conflict with the constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms. The new legal
Edit supposedly contains the elements of an impermissible retroactive is a violation
the principle of protection of legitimate expectations and of legal certainty and is discriminatory.
5. In the draft of the regional court are cited objections to the applicant that
the regional court considered the logical and aligns itself with how their contents,
so even with their formulations. Therefore, the regional court of design summarizes the constitutionally
the relevant arguments of the applicant, which takes over in your proposal.
6. the applicant points out, in particular, the retroactive effect of the new legislation,
you see that the amendment of the Act was a major influence on the way
the claim and the amount of the benefit. The new law brings modes
various lengths of parental benefit and depending on the length of
also, different amount of parental allowance, both of which are associated with
the existence of the right to maternity benefit. Amendments to the law so directly
the conditions of entitlement to parents on parental benefits, which
can be considered as unlawful intervention of State power into the one already acquired
rights [to the petitioner refers to the finding of the Constitutional Court, SP. zn. PL.
TC 21/96 dated 4.2.1997 (N 13/7 SbNU 87; 63/1997)].
7. Violation of the principle of protection of legitimate expectations and legal certainty, it is allegedly
illogical and non-system establishing the State social support benefits on
sickness insurance, which is, however, a voluntary discharge. By the time of
the effectiveness of the amendment to the Act there was no such link and applicant
could not reasonably be expected in the future to such link occurs, and
It will be in arrears apply to relations already incurred and acquired rights.
Such a procedure is, in the opinion of the applicant contrary to the conclusions of the award
The Constitutional Court, SP. zn. IV. TC 215/94 dated 8.6.1995 (N 30/3 SbNU 227).
8. the new legislation is based on the claimant and discriminatory. Neither
the explanatory memorandum to the law on the public budget stabilization does not, of
Why are parents of children who are entitled to parental
post on 1 January 2007. 1.2008, divided into three groups: while the uneven
two of the three groups of parents is determined by the amount of a fixed amount, for
the third group of paid mode, amended by Act No. 117/1995 Coll., new assessment
entitlement to parental benefits under other criteria, it was
the one that existed at the time of birth of the child, is discriminatory because it
as a result of the new conditions established by the text of the law adopted,
experiencing financial loss of legitimate parents.
The assessment of the admissibility of the
9. the Constitutional Court finds that the petition was filed by authorized body in
accordance with § 64 para. 3 of the law on the Constitutional Court and that this is a proposal for a
permissible (section 66 of Act 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, as amended by law
No 48/2002 Coll.). The proposal complies with the formal requirements of an application for annulment
Recap of the observations of the parties and the authorities of the respondent State
10. The Constitutional Court has taken in terms of the provisions of § 69 para. 1 of the law on
The Constitutional Court comments on the proposal from both houses of the Czech Parliament
States, as parties to the proceedings and representation of the Minister of labour and
11. In the representation of the Chamber of Deputies, signed by its President
Miroslava Němcová, States that a draft law on the stabilisation of public
budgets were at first reading by the House commanded by to discuss
the Committee for social policy, the Committee on health and budgetary
the Committee, with the Committee for social policy and the Budget Committee shall adopt the
the resolution, in which it recommended that the Bill be rejected. After detailed
the debate was on the Bill in the second debate, adopted a number of
amendments, which, however, did not concern the contested provisions.
The Bill as amended by the amendments was the Chamber of
the Chamber of Deputies on 21 February 2006. 8.2007 approved by the number of votes for the 101 against 99 of the
present 200 members. In conclusion, the chairwoman of the expressed
the Chamber's belief that the adopted Act No. 261/2007 Coll., that contains the
the contested provisions, in accordance with the Constitution of the Czech Republic.
12. the President of the Senate of Milan Štěch pointed out in its observations that it is a
the transitional provisions in which the procedure is modified to provide
parental allowance after the amendment of the Act on State social support,
made by Act No. 261/2007 Coll., by the introduction of the so-called. třírychlostního
the parental benefit.
13. the President of the Chamber referred to the contents of the observations sent by
The Constitutional Court in connection with the three proposals of the Group of members and
the Senators that were directed against other transitional provisions of the law,
governing the Constitutional Court dealt with already shortly after its adoption (case of proceedings
led by the Constitutional Court under the SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/07, pl. ÚS 1/08 and PL. ÚS
2/08). Because it is about the law, which the Senate has already expressed,
This refers to the expression of the Chamber to control the led under the SP. zn. Pl. ÚS
24/07 and saw no need to ship anything to it, as the Senate on the
a meeting of the Senate adopted a resolution, in which he showed the will of the draft law
to dwell on.
14. In conclusion, the President of the Chamber also pointed out in the conclusions of the constitutional
Court SP. zn. PL. ÚS 2/08 of APR 23, 2008 (N 73/49 SbNU 85; 166/2008
Coll.), which dealt with the issue of social security in terms of
constitutionally the legal assessment of the amendments relating to the conditions of eligibility and the amount of
some State social security benefits, even in the area of changes
State social support benefits. He recalled that in the context of the question of the
failure to comply with the "legitimate expectations", the Constitutional Court concluded that the
the application is not in the area of social rights "entirely appropriate". In
the context of the examination of the proposal considered the President of the Chamber for the appropriate
point out the different views that are in the area of changes in the provision of
parental benefits occur in the decision-making practice of the courts. For example, the
a compelling argument of the alleged unconstitutional retroactive was dealt with in the judgment
The Supreme Administrative Court SP. zn. 3 Ads 111/2010-44 in connection with
cassation complaints relating to the granting of the parental contribution referred to in
the legislation made by the Act No. 261/2007 Coll. in the abovementioned judgment
the Supreme Administrative Court came to the conclusion that in the present case as to the
mocked-up the retroactive effect and the legislation in question in this respect fully
meet the theoretical and judikatorním requirements.
15. the Constitutional Court also received the proposal delivered by the Secretary
labour and Social Affairs Dr. Ing. Jaromír Drábek, in particular
the opposition opposes the intervener concerning amendments to the conditions of entitlement to
dose and stresses that the changes are only in the ways of drawing
the parental benefit, and the determination of its amount. The introduction of a "multi-speed
the structure of "drawing benefits in three areas laid down in hard
amounts (increased, basic and reduced) allows parents to taking into account the
specific circumstances himself chose for him the optimal Variant.
16. by the contested transitional provisions of Act No. 261/2007 Coll. Minister
He stated that they are necessary not only for the uniform legal regulation of the
issues, but also for the preservation of the principle of equality between parents
čerpajícími parental allowance. Since the new legislation abolishes the
existing legislation, parental allowance, and parents who have received
parental allowance under the earlier rules, they cannot choose
the method of drawing the right to parental benefits under the new legislation,
If the child has already reached such an age, which is already the law of the right option
and it isn't, it was necessary for these cases establish a rule that specifies the amount of
parental allowance so as to maintain equality between parents,
pobírajícími parental allowance calculated under different legal
17. In its observations, the Minister disagrees with the claim of the applicant that the
the changes introduced by the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., directly affecting the conditions
entitlement to parental benefit, since this batch has been and is
associated with only a single legal reality, which is caring for the child. On
a parent has the right to this benefit regardless of whether previously received benefits
sickness insurance associated with maternity or childbirth. The determinant
criterion for the childcare allowance is in addition to the timeout
personal day and proper care of the child's parents, and it's a full calendar
month. The concept of entitlement to parental benefit, and the determination of its
the above are so based on the relationship between the amount of relation, indirectly, parental
the post and the time of its receipt.
18. The above observations of the President of the Chamber of Deputies, the President of the
Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic and the Minister of labour and Social Affairs
was sent to the eventual reply to the applicant. Regional Court in Brno
non-dated 4. 1.2013 that lingers on its arguments
contained in the proposal.
The abandonment of an oral hearing
19. After the above rekapitulovaném the course of proceedings, the Constitutional Court decided to
the conclusion that there is no need to hold an oral hearing in the matter, as it did not bring
For more or better and clearer clarification of things than how she
from the written acts of the applicant and the parties. Having regard to the wording of §
44 of the law on the Constitutional Court, in the wording of his amendment made by Act No.
404/2012 Coll., effective since 1. 1.2013, the Constitutional Court ruled without holding
the oral proceedings. That, in proceedings instituted before the entry into force of
This amendment to the Constitutional Court, with regard to the procedural practices, continue
According to the new rules, the Constitutional Court has notified all parties and
the general public in a communication of 18 August plenum 12.2012, which was
published under no. 469/2009 Coll., for completeness of the Constitutional Court at the same time, he adds,
that has not been done in the management of the taking of evidence and came out only from the content of the file
Regional Court in Brno, SP. zn. 57 Ca 14/2009 and from the written observations
the applicant and the parties.
The constitutional conformity of the legislative process
20. The legislative process of the adoption of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll. was Constitutional
the Court found constitutionally Conformal already in the award of 31 July. January 2008
SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/07, therefore, in the present proceedings it was not to be
to deal with.
The diction of the contested provisions
21. The contested provisions of Act No. 261/2007 Coll.:
' Article XXIV
4. Parental allowance provided for by the specific provisions in the text of the
effective until the date of entry into force of this law, shall be from 1. January 2008
and in the base area to) 3 years of age the child if the youngest child in the
family giving entitlement to parental benefits 1. January 2008
achieve the 21 months of age, and after reaching 3 years old this child belongs
parental benefits at a reduced area to 4 years of age of the child,
(b)) at a reduced area of up to 4 years of age, when the youngest child in the
family giving entitlement to parental benefit after 31 December 2006. December 2007
reach 3 years of age 1. January 2008.
5. the right to parental benefit pursuant to article. XXIII, with respect to a claim to
parental benefits accruing to 31. in December 2007, according to the
Special regulations, in the version in force until the date of entry into force of
This Act, the State social support, the Office shall decide on the basis of the request
the parental benefits brought by that Office. "
Legal assessment of the Constitutional Court
22. the proposal is not, as regards the alleged unconstitutionality of the content of the contested
VIIa/. A summary of the substantive changes to the contested provisions produce
23. Act No. 261/2007 Coll., on the public budget stabilization, which was
at 31 December 2002. 12.2007 was amended to also Act No 117/1995 Coll., on State
social support was part of the large changes in the social field, which
the legislature followed the aim to reduce social spending. also in the payment of
the birth grant and the parental benefit. These measures, in accordance with the Government
presented by the explanatory memorandum should be prevented from deepening public
debt and increasing the deficit of the State budget of the Czech Republic.
24. New legislation, enshrined in the amended provisions of section 32
paragraph. 1 of Act No. 117/1995 Coll., introduces the mj. the so-called program. multi-speed
the structure of the parental benefit in three areas
laid down in fixed amounts:
-increased acreage (one and a half times the basic amount) shall be the amount 11
-the basic amount shall be the amount of 7600.0,-CZK
-reduced area (half the basic amount) shall be the amount of CZK 3800.0.
25. A parent under this new legislation may choose:
-the faster the parental benefit-after the financial assistance in
maternity, sickness or financial assistance provided in the context of
with the birth (all three of these doses are hereafter referred to only a shortcut
"PPM") belongs to a parent post in an elevated area within 24 months of age
of the child;
-"classic" parental benefit-after PPM belongs to a parent
post in the base area to 36 months of age of the child;
-the slower the parental benefit-after PPM or from birth
the child belongs to a parent post in the base area in the 18 months of age
of the child and in the reduced acreage to 48 months of age of the child.
26. The choice of time in receipt of parental allowance, and the amount and level of PPM
always refers to the youngest child in the family. Drawing option selected
It is not unchangeable, to apply retroactively (even when changing the parents
in receipt of the parental allowance). The parent who is not entitled to maternity benefits,
automatically receive parental benefits since the birth of the child in the mode
a slower drawdown of benefits. A faster drawdown may ask a parent,
If the amount of its PPM reaches at least 380.0 per calendar day and if
made a decision for the faster the parental benefit
at the latest when you reach 22 (31) weeks of life of the child. In this case,
belongs to a parent post in an elevated area (i.e., 11400.0). In
other cases, a parent must at 18 months of age to decide
for the "classic" or the slower the parental benefit.
27. in the case of disabled children in new entitlement legislation
the parental contribution to the age of 7, a child in the base area.
28. the new legislation on the right to parental benefit so the parent who
caring for a small child, should make it easier to decide if and how
time will receive the parental allowance and also how much will this
dose is provided. This is intended to allow the parent to better align their
parental responsibilities and professional role, depending on the specific situation
in the family.
29. An essential condition of entitlement to parental benefits is personal
full-day and parents about the proper care of the youngest child in the family. When you meet
This condition belongs to be entitled to parental benefits in several
variants with a choice of one of them the choice of the parents.
30. the conditions of entitlement to parental benefits are regulated by the provisions of the
section 30 of Act No. 117/1995 Coll. and the parental benefits provisions
§ 32 of the same law.
31. The previous law the parental benefit (prior to Amendment
performed by the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.) has been compared to the current edit different
in particular, on the following issues:
-parental benefits previously provided to the parent who cares for the whole
calendar month, at least one child aged up to 4 years of age, or up to 7 years
If the child is seriously disabled or long-term heavily disabled
-If the parents belonged to the maternity benefit (financial assistance, or
sick leave granted in connection with childbirth), paid to the parent
post only, if it was higher than this financial assistance, in the amount of
-the amount of parental benefit was derived from the average wage in
non-business sphere and amounted to 40% of the salary;
-still, if the parent is gainfully employed;
-the child giving rise to entitlement to the benefit could be placed in the Manger or
other pre-school facilities for a limited period of time;
-the family is provided (as according to the applicable legislation, now)
a parental allowance (only one of the parents), even when the parents
care for more children of the relevant age;
-If the child belonged, which gives rise to a parental allowance,
care allowance, parental allowance he belonged at half rate.
32. It must be held that the conditions for the ways of the parental
contribution and for his assessment, the newly introduced as a result of the transitional
the provisions of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., affected employment,
lead for certain their constellation to the fact that some of the beneficiaries
parental benefit occurs, as opposed to the State before the amendment to drop
paid amounts. It admits even top cited
observations to the Minister of labour and Social Affairs, which States that
revised by modifying occurred "some restrictions in the area of social
Security ". The Minister, however, believes that "these restrictions fall short
such effort, which would be in conflict with the constitutional modification contained in the
The Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms ("the Charter"), let alone that it would
the realization of social rights was concerned refuted ".
VIIB/. An assessment of the constitutional objections, contained in the draft
33. The Constitutional Court in connection with the proposed regional court in Brno
mainly notes that compliance with the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., on stabilisation of the
public budgets, with the constitutional order of the Czech Republic and international
treaties in many aspects already dealt with in several of its findings [see
findings SP. zn. PL. ÚS 23/09 dated March 15. 5.2012 (245/2012), SP. zn.
PL. ÚS 54/10 of 24 July 2003. 4.2012 (186/2012), SP. zn. PL. ÚS 1/08 from
on 20 April. 5.2008 (N 91/49 SbNU 273; 251/2008 Coll.), SP. zn. PL. ÚS 2/08
of 23 December 2003. 7.2008 (N 73/49 SbNU 85; 166/2008 Coll.), SP. zn. Pl. ÚS
24/07 of 31 July. 1.2008 (N 26/48 SbNU 303; 88/2008 Coll.)].
34. Therefore, in the present proceedings, the Constitutional Court dealt with only those
ústavněprávními questions, which stated in its proposal, the applicant, and
that reflect even the opposition, the applicant relied on the prior administrative and
VIIba/Objection impermissible retroactive and illegal intervention by State
power to the already acquired rights
35. in the view of the applicant's law, contained in paragraphs 4 and 5
Article XXIV of the transitional provisions of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., the expression
impermissible retroactive, since the amendment of the Act touched just above
dose, but first in a straight way of entitlement. Reverse action
of the Act the applicant illustrates the conditions applicable to the time
before the effective date of the Act.
36. On the question of impermissible retroactive to the Constitutional Court expressed in the
a number of its decisions [such as the discovery of 15 July. 5.2012 SP. zn. Pl. ÚS
17/11 (220/2009 Coll.), the award of 4 April 2003. 2.1997, SP. zn. PL. ÚS 21/96 (see
above)]. In the latter finding Constitutional Court stated in General
prohibition of retroactive law right; This ban right
-retroactivity is one of the basic principles of defining a category
the rule of law. The ban is retroactive from the right, there are only
strictly limited exceptions. In connection with the definition of the difference between right
and mocked-up retroaktivitou, the Constitutional Court stated that "in General, in cases
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
repealed by law, be governed by the new law. The emergence of legal relations,
existing before the entry into force of the new legislation, legal claims,
which of these relationships were formed, as well as legal acts carried out, shall be governed by
the repealed law (a consequence of the opposite interpretation conflict of laws
the standards would be right;) ".
37. In the case under consideration the transitional provisions of the new (intertemporální)
the law fixes the continuity, and the persistence of a right or a legal
relations entered into an earlier legal standard before the entry into force of the new
the legal standards. This intertemporální provisions depending on the nature of the
maintained relationships leave accrued rights or legal relations either in
the old mode of legislation, or vice versa to them applied a new legal
editing, usually under the sanctions the right or legal relationship.
The Constitutional Court has come to the conclusion that, in the present case, it is a
the retroactive effect to an identical conclusion counterfeit (and reached the Supreme Administrative
the Court in its judgment of 13 January 2005. 1.2011 No. 3 Ads 111/2010-44). Detailed
the argument for such a conclusion is identical to what is contained in the report
The Constitutional Court, SP. zn. PL. ÚS 17/11 of 15.5.2012 (220/2009 Sb.);
Therefore, it can be because of a brief reference. In the case under consideration this
False; does not constitute unconstitutional interference with the legal
certainty and acquired rights.
VIIbb/. Infringement of the principle of legitimate expectations
38. the concept of legitimate expectations can be contacted in the case with the question
the admissibility of the false-retroactivity, as its essence is relevant
securities interest which falls according to its content under the protection of article 11
paragraph. 1 of the Charter and article 1 of the additional protocol to the Convention on the protection of
human rights and fundamental freedoms, concerning the right of everyone to the peaceful
enjoy your property [cf. closer finding the Constitutional Court from day 1. 7.
2010 SP. zn. PL. ÚS 9/07 (N 132/58 SbNU 3; 242/2010 Sb.) and the award of the day
15.5. 2012 SP. zn. PL. ÚS 17/11]. According to settled case-law of the European
Court of human rights, the concept of "assets", is contained in that article,
The additional protocol should be interpreted as meaning that the autonomous content that has
is not limited to the ownership of tangible assets and does not depend on formal
qualifications of national law (judgment of 22 June 1999. 6.2004 in case
complaint No 31443/96-Broniowski against Poland, paragraph 129).
39. the Constitutional Court in its findings, the majority expressed hesitation to
implementation of social rights enshrined in the Charter, as the title of the fourth's
is aware that the range of social rights (which include also
the provision of parental allowance) is limited by the State
budget, supported the results of the management of the State. It was only in the context of these
the options are applicable limits, the relevant articles of the Charter,
governing social rights. The assessment of the effectiveness and appropriateness of the
legal provisions in this area leaves the responsibility of the Constitutional Court
the legislature, which the Constitutional Court except in the cases identified
neústavnosti cannot intervene. It is about issues inherently
political. Conceptual feature of social rights is the fact that they do not have
unconditional nature and you can claim them only within the limits
applicable law [article 41 of the Charter). This lack of direct enforceability of the
manifested in buying their legal definition, which is then at the same time
condition specific realization of individual social rights (see findings
The Constitutional Court, SP. zn. PL. ÚS 8/07 dated 23.3.2010 (N 61/56 SbNU 653;
135/2010 Sb.), SP. zn. PL. ÚS 2/08 of APR 23, 2008 (N 73/49 SbNU 85;
40. Although the provisions of article 41 paragraph 2. 1 of the Charter allows for lawmakers
lay down specific conditions for the realization of social rights, their legal
the definition must not be contrary to the constitutional principles, in other words,
the laws that govern them, may not constitutionally guaranteed social rights fully
to deny or cancel. As in the case of fundamental rights and freedoms,
directly enforceable on the basis of the Charter, they must, in the case of social
the rights of the legislature respecting the rule referred to in article 4, paragraph 2. 4
Of the Charter, which States that when using the provisions on the limits of the fundamental rights of the
and freedoms must be preserved, the nature and the meaning of. Under consideration
the case reached the Constitutional Court concluded that the legislature these principles
41. The Constitutional Court does not agree with the appellant that the new legislation
parental contribution represented a change in the conditions of entitlement to
This dose. The content of the amendments to the parental benefit is mainly in
following up on its size. The purpose of such treatment is also the participation of
decisions on the choice of time authorized parents, the way and the amount of pumping
This dose. The contested provisions intertemporální rationally
difference is justified objective, namely, to establish the rules for determining the amount of the parental
the allowance for those parents who have not yet received parental benefits
According to the law effective from 1. 1.2008 and they could not do
the choice of the right to parental benefits under the new legislation because of the
the age of the child, with which the law already claim option will not combine.
The existence of these rules is in the interest of compliance with the principle of equality between
his parents pobírajícími the parental contribution calculated according to the different
VIIbc/. The objection impermissible discrimination
42. The legal regulation of parental allowance before the effective date of Act No.
261/2007 Coll. did not permit overlapping of benefits of sickness insurance (cash
maternity benefit, financial assistance, or sick leave granted in the
childbirth) and parental allowance, and that at the time from the date of
the birth of the child. And new legislation on the overlapping of benefits of a partially
excludes, as admits receiving parental benefits in addition to the
maternity or sickness that is provided in the
childbirth only equal to the difference between the parents and children
the contribution of and between doses of sickness insurance. As in earlier
legislation is implemented by the legislature's intention to prevent the so
concurrent provision of maternity benefit to the mother and the provision of
parental allowance to the father of the child. This adjustment, though down
previous levels, with the terms of the Constitution is acceptable; can be
accept the thesis that the State social support benefits picked up only,
If the life situation of the individual cannot be addressed through the provision of benefits from
the first pillar insurance system, whose part is also the sickness
insurance, which in principle has precedence over the benefits
security, provided for the same reason.
43. Failure of the revenue associated with the birth of the child, due to the new adjustment,
at least in part covers the parental allowance as a social benefit
the aid. On this dose has a parent claim, regardless of whether earlier
He has already received health insurance benefits associated with maternity or childbirth.
Entitlement to parental benefit was not, and even now is not bound to
the existence of the right to maternity benefit, as it arises, even in
the situation in which the person is entitled to a maternity benefit.
44. přitakat navrhovatelově opinion that the new legislation
parental allowance and how some groups are pumping
parents ' discrimination against them. Act No. 261/2007 Coll. laid down the conditions for the
determining the amount of parental allowance so that both parents, which is
a child is born after 1. 1.2008, as well as parents, that the child was born before
to this date, are entitled to the same level of the parental contribution for the
provided that they meet the conditions for entitlement to parental benefit in
a specific amount.
45. The Constitutional Court concluded that the adoption has been contested in any way
a provision in some cases to reduce the previously achieved levels
social rights, it was not for the above reasons for such action, which
would be violated as a result of their nature and purpose.
46. in the light of the foregoing, the Constitutional Court of the regional court
in Brno under the provisions of section 70 para. 2 of the Act 4. 182/1993 Coll., on the constitutional
the Court rejected.
The President of the Constitutional Court:
JUDr. Rychetský in r.