The Constitutional Court
On behalf of the United States
The Constitutional Court ruled on 17. November 1998 in the plenary on the proposal to repeal
§ 32 para. 7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and
fees, as subsequently amended,
The proposal is rejected.
Municipal Court in Prague by order of 3 July 2003. December 1997, SP. zn. 38 Ca
438/96 was stopped proceedings against the complainant (applicant)
the defendant Financial Directorate for hl. m. Threshold of action against
the defendant's decision of 30 September 2002. September 1996 no ANALYSIS-3911/1/96. This
decision the appeal was dismissed by the complainant against the decision
The Tax Office for Prague 4 of 14 July 2004. March 1996 No.
8701/2.1/96/SVA//1104, as amended by the decision of 2 June 2003. May 1996 No.
22843/2.1/96/SVA/2943 for a certificate of invalidity decisions of the financial
the Office for Prague 4 of 5. October 1994 no. 15360/1/94/SA/4125.
In the grounds of the cited resolutions of the municipal court in Prague said that
the decision on the verification of the invalidity of the decision has only a declaratory
character, because does not create or alter any rights and obligations
tax entities. Then, what is the tax administrator and verified by the annulment of the
some of its decisions, is another decision again decided in
things, and this decision is decided about rights and obligations
the tax entity. According to the provisions of § 244 paragraph. the code of civil
procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the row"), the courts in the administrative judiciary
review the lawfulness of the decisions of public authorities which
According to the provisions of § 244 paragraph. 3. row means the decision of the administrative
authorities issued in the administrative procedure, as well as other decisions
based, shall amend or repeal privileges and obligations of a natural or
legal persons. Because they say, however, a decision on the verification of the invalidity of the
the decision of the rights or obligations of the tax bodies shall create, does not change the
or, in this case has not been given the power of the Court to review the
the contested decision. Therefore, the court proceedings to a halt.
Judgment of the municipal court in Prague, of 9 November. December 1997, SP. zn. 38 Ca
439/96 was rejected the complainant's action against the decision of the financial
Directorate for hl. m. Threshold of 24 September. October 1996 no ANALYSIS-7508/1/96.
This decision was dismissed by the appeal's financial Directorate
the complainant against the decision of the Tax Office for Prague 4 of 31 July.
August 1994 no. 20704, which was based on an additional tax
the income tax returns of individuals for the year 1993 in determined basis
taxes in the amount of $ 252,373.35 and doměřena tax of 52 000.
According to the contested judgment was the progress of tax control:
The complainant paid on 9 April. August 1994, the underpayment of income tax
natural persons for the year 1993 in the amount of 51 400 CZK. Because her tax office
for Prague 4 not sending payment Bill, submitted on 7 December. September 1994 the appeal
the decision on the determination of the tax base and personal income tax
people for the year 1993. This revocation tax office for Prague 4 decision
of 5 April 2004. October 1994 no. 15360/1/94/SA/4125 by complainant
He was overpaid taxes in the amount of Czk 51 400 returned. On 14 June 2005. However, March 1996
Tax Office for Prague 4 published under no. 8071/2.1/96/SVA/1104
certificate of invalidity of the cited decisions of the tax authority for the
The threshold of 4 of 5 November. October 1994 and a further decision on 2 December. May 1996
No j. 22843/2.1/SVA/2943 (about correcting obvious errors and mistakes)
This decision to the invalidity of the certificate corrected. For appeals against
those decisions decided the financial Directorate for hl. m. Doorstep delivery
September 30, 1996 under no. ANALYSIS-3911/1/96 so that it is rejected. Then decided to
24 September. October 1996 under no ANALYSIS-7508/1/96 on the rejection of the appeal
the complainant against the decision of the Tax Office for Prague 4 of 31 July.
August 1994 no. 20704.
The municipal court in Prague, in the grounds of the judgment under appeal denied the objection
the complainant, that next to each other, there are two conflicting decisions on the same
case, and that, secondly, the decision of the Tax Office for Prague 4 of 5.
October 1994 no. 15360/1/94/SA/4125 (which has the obligation to
pay tax on the income of natural persons for the year 1993), both in the present proceedings
the contested decision of the Finance Directorate for hl. m. Threshold of 24 September.
October 1996 no ANALYSIS-7508/1/96 (in which she was obliged to
pay doměřenou the tax for the year 1993 in the amount of Czk 52 000). Municipal Court
Prague has come to the conclusion that this claim is unfounded, since the decision
The Tax Office for Prague 4 of 5. October 1994 cannot be taken into account,
because it is invalid and has been explicitly declared it invalid. Therefore,
Prague City Court dismissed the action.
Those decisions challenged the constitutional complaint, the complainant in which the
claimed that they have been violated her constitutional rights deriving from article. 36
and from the article. 38 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms ("the Charter").
The question of whether the decision of the Tax Office for Prague 4 of 5. October
1994 for refund of overpaid taxes or not valid, was questionable
and in 1994, it was this decision that has become final. The municipal court in Prague,
He says in his complaint the contested resolution of 3 July 2003. December 1997
filed an action from a substantive point of view ever did and only found
the decision on the verification of the invalidity of the decision has merely a declaratory
character. The Court reportedly completely overlooked the provisions of the United
the National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and fees, as amended by
amended, of which clearly shows that the challenged
decisions of administrative authorities are not merely declaratory, since they
experiencing interference with the rights and obligations of tax subjects. Under section 46
paragraph. 5. the Act "means the assessed tax from the tax referred to in
tax return or report, the tax administrator may not disclose tax
the result of the assessment of the body, provided that the tax entity explicitly requested
by the end of the next reporting period. In this case, for
the day the tax assessment and at the same time for the day of notification of this decision to the tax
the body is considered the last day of the period for filing a tax return or
message, and if the tax return or report has been lodged out of time, day,
When the tax authorities. As well, when time limits proceed, even for
an additional tax return or report. ". Under the provisions of section 40
paragraph. 1 of the law "if it is not in this or in another tax law
unless otherwise specified, the tax is payable within the time limit for the submission of the tax return
or report ". Pursuant to § 48 para. 12 "the appeal does not have suspensory effect,
unless otherwise provided by this Act or a special ".
The complainant therefore considers that a decision on the invalidity of the certificate
a final decision on the appeal in her case has a major impact on the
its rights and obligations in tax proceedings. With regard to the repayment terms
taxes, for a moment, the tax assessment and the absence of suspensive effect of the appeal in the
Indeed, the complainant produces tax proceedings the obligation to pay the tax no longer
the release of legal power, respectively, and the decision to certify the nullity
the decision, which upheld the appeal of the complainant, was not to
a new decision on the matter. Therefore, the applicant takes the view that, if the
the Court did not address the claim merits, she was denied the right to
the Court of protection under the Charter.
Making a decision on this matter (SP. zn. Ca 38 439/96) is directly dependent on
consideration and decision in the case conducted under the SP. zn. 38 Ca 438/96 even if
was taken in Prague municipal court's argument to the effect that
the decision on the certificate of invalidity of decision is not a decision which
itself may be subject to review by the Court, and issue resolution on stopping
Therefore, the management was in accordance with the o. s. l., the Court in proceedings under the sp.
Zn. Ca 38 439/96ponechat go unnoticed the assertions and evidence submitted by the
stěžovatelkou, of which allegedly shows the validity of the initial decision
administrative authority. If it is the original decision of the administrative authority
all of the following are valid the decision of the administrative authority, and paakty
they cannot be taken into account. The Court, however, the question of the validity or
the invalidity of the original decision of the administrative authority from 1994 at all
did, so even in proceedings under the SP. zn. 38 Ca 439/96 was
complainant refused the right to judicial protection.
Along with a constitutional complaint the complainant filed an application for annulment
the provisions of § 32 para. 7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on the
the administration of taxes and fees, in the wording of later regulations, as it considers
that is in breach of article. 37 para. 3 of the Charter, according to which everyone's
the participants in the proceedings are equal. This article is apparently also applies to proceedings in
matters of taxes and fees and the contested provision violates, because
"causing inequality between participants in the tax proceedings and no doubt is
administrative authority of the exploitable ". He was (1) "under the pretext of
the alleged missing elements of the decision "to make void your
decision without was forced to follow the procedural provisions for
review of tax decision (section 55b cit. of the Act) or of the renewal
management, (2) make invalid any time decisions
term without any limitation period, (3) make invalid their
the validity of the decision, without the original final decision was
subject to review by the Court, (4.) to apply gradually the various reasons
the invalidity of the decision, and (5) for the removal of the alleged deficiencies
the previous decision to issue a new decision quite contrary
the content. Similar to the procedural steps reportedly is unparalleled in any other
the procedural law of the Czech Republic. Cases where it is necessary to the original
the decision of the tax authorities to replace the decision, apparently can be addressed
the use of extraordinary remedies ensuring also the procedural
the rights of the tax entity and not the way the "zbavujícím tax entity
as a party to the proceedings any legal guarantees after a time limit
period and no possibility of Defense. " Is said to be completely against the spirit and basic
the principles of the democratic rule of law, the State is represented by a
authority to drop its own misconduct in a manner that denies
citizen rights acquired in good faith and at the same time it prevents them from the application of the
Therefore, the applicant claims that the decision was referred to in the title bar
Municipal Court in Prague, and at the same time canceled annulment
the provisions of § 32 para. 7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on the
the administration of taxes and fees, in the wording of later regulations.
By resolution of the Senate and the Constitutional Court of 25 October. March 1998, SP. zn. (I).
TC 40/98 was a constitutional complaint pursuant to the provisions of § 78 para. 1
Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, and the proposal to repeal
cit. provisions of that law, the plenum of the Constitutional Court has been referred to the
decision under article 9(1). 87 para. 1 (b). and the Constitution of the United States).
The application for annulment of the provisions of § 32 para. 7. the Act is in accordance with § 69
Act No. 182/1993 Coll. expressed the party-Chamber of Deputies
Parliament of the Czech Republic. According to § 49 paragraph 1. 1 of the law on the Constitutional Court
He asked the Constitutional Court to the observations of the Ministry of finance.
The Chamber of Deputies stated in its observations, that the contested provisions of §
32 para. 7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and
fees, as amended, provides for the annulment of the decision
the tax administrator in the case, in the absence of any relevant decision, which in
It must be included, (except for obvious errors in writing and counting). Such
the decision is a pitiful Act (paaktem), which is seen as
invalid from the very beginning. Until such time, however, is shown (confirmed)
to the contrary, they viewed as correct. The complainant's proposal to repeal
the contested provision is said to be nedůvodný, as the "theoretically can each
the provisions of the law applied in the wrong way, and therefore, there is
the right to invoke their rights by using legal remedies ". Objections
the complainant allegedly rails against the way of the application of the provisions.
the tax administrator in a particular case. The law does not exclude, on the basis of
declare invalid the original decision was issued a new decision,
and even factually different. Even in this case, however, the procedural rights of
a participant in the tax control is maintained, as also against this new
the decision has the option to appeal. The question of the time in which it can
be the invalidity of the validation decision has been taken, the law was expressly
It is not defined, but it is virtually intended meaning, that such
the decision, in effect, has. If it is the task of the tax administrator
properly and in the correct amount of tax to choose, then this time defined
the limitation period in which it is possible to assess and select tax.
The Chamber of deputies also said that the Czech National Council Act No.
337/1992 Coll. (as well as its amendment to by-law No. 255/1994 Coll.)
approved by the required majority of the members of the legislature, have been
signed by the respective constitutional actors and duly promulgated. The legislative
the choir at the time of the adoption of this law, acted in the belief that the received
the law is constitutionally Conformal and in accordance with the law.
The Finance Ministry in its statement said that the constitutional requirement
equality in the procedural position of all tax entities is ensured in
the provisions of § 2 (2). 8 the Czech National Council Act No. 337/1992 Coll.
The provisions of § 32 para. 7. the Act lays down the procedure and the reasons for
certificate of invalidity of an administrative decision. This is said to be a very
a delicate and difficult matter, and therefore the "precise rules defining the
the space of the administrative discretion for this eventuality can be considered
improving the legal status and legal certainty of tax subjects,
as well as the tax administrators ". The decision on the invalidity of the certificate
decision the appeal is accepted, then there is no no
a procedural obstacle to the eventual release of the new decision on the case.
The Ministry of finance to the claim of the complainant on the exploitability of the contested
the provisions argued that you cannot exclude abuses of any provision
law, and therefore also the law permits the use of corrective
resources to remedy the situation and to protect the rights of addressees of the decision.
This "exploitability theoretical possibility" is said to be, however, for the assessment of
the constitutionality of particular provisions of the law is completely irrelevant;
filing material could certify only the erroneous application of law
regulations and not their unconstitutionality. The invalidity of the certificate itself
the decision is purely declaratory Act, and therefore cannot claim to
the contested provision allows you to make decisions invalid under the pretext of
their missing requirements.
To each of the objections to the complainant, the Ministry of Finance stated:
(1) the claim of the complainant, that the tax may make its decision
invalid, without being forced to follow the provisions on the review
tax decision or a retrial, it ignores that these resources
It can be used only for the actual decision and "they" cannot
be the invalidity of the decision which is the only authoritative
verification of the existence of paaktu.
(2.) this certificate cannot be said to be issued at any time
term, even if the law expressly for the contested provisions do not provide for a time limit,
but--depending on the nature of the decision (which has to be certified by the
it invalid)--the case of the application of the limitation period under section 47 of the Act
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll. (on the tax assessment), or the limitation
period referred to in section 70. Act (with tax).
(3) the possibility of such a decision by a Court of the Ministry of
refused comment and only drew attention to the fact that courts stop
proceedings, if its the subject of paakt issued in tax proceedings; per priority
tax management said it can be considered that the law defines exactly which
cases of defects not remedied or rectified decision classic correction
(4) as regards the gradual application of the reasons the invalidity of the decision,
the Ministry of finance does not consider possible and fair.
(5) Finally, the Ministry of Finance reported that the verification of the invalidity of the
the decision cannot be considered the Elimination of deficiencies of an invalid
the decision, as this is the proper and extraordinary legal remedies.
However, such a procedure cannot be applied to paaktů; When the certificate of invalidity
the decision they viewed as non-existent from the beginning, and in the
the same case, it is necessary to issue a new decision, against which the addressee may
the appeal, so his procedural rights are not affected.
The Finance Ministry believes that the constitutional complaint is targeted, as
"the complainant does not seem satisfied with the finding of the actual amount of tax
obligations in tax proceedings "and" trying to create a replacement process
the problem, which fixes its tax liability. " Therefore, The Ministry Of
Treasury recommends that the claim for annulment of the contested provisions did not
Referred to the observations of the Ministry of finance assesses the Constitutional Court as a witness
According to § 49 paragraph 1. 1 Act No. 182/1993 Coll. and its contents as a single
of the foundations of its conclusions, as is logical, persuasive and
constitutional terms acceptable.
Custom analysis of things
1. The Constitutional Court first dealt with the question of whether a formal
assumptions of the validity of the contested provision of the Czech National Council
No. 337/1992 Coll., as amended. In this respect, it is of
stenoprotokolů (electronic library the CZECH NATIONAL COUNCIL, 1990-1992, 35.)
found that at the meeting of the Czech National Council on 5 July 2004. May 1992, the law was
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., approved by a majority of 108 votes for, 0
against and 2 abstained. This law was approved by the constitutionally
in the prescribed manner, then was signed by the respective constitutional factors
and was properly declared in the statute book in the amount of 70 in 1992. From
těsnopisecké report on the meeting of the Chamber of Deputies No. 25, 1. the piece,
It follows that the 8 March. in December 1994, the Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament
the Republic has adopted the 108 votes for, 38 against (16 abstentions
vote) the Government Bill amending and supplementing the law of the United
the National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and fees, as amended by
amended. Of Act No. 255/1994 Coll., which-among other things-
includes a contested provision § 32 para. 7. Act No. 255/1994 Sb.
therefore approved by the constitutionally prescribed way, then was signed by the
respective constitutional officials, and was duly promulgated in the collection of laws in
the amount of 74 of 1994.
The Constitutional Court therefore finds that the Czech National Council Act No. 337/1992
Coll., on administration of taxes and fees, and Act No. 255/1994 Coll., amending
and supplementing Act of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and
fees, as amended, were adopted and issued within the limits of
The Constitution laid down the competence and constitutionally prescribed way (§ 68 para.
2 Act No. 182/1993 Coll.).
2. On the substance of the Constitutional Court States:
and the applicant lodged the proposal) seeks the annulment of the provisions of § 32 para.
7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., as amended
regulations, according to which "If the decision is missing some of the other
the basic requirement, which according to the nature of the decision must be an
content, or a justification in cases where the law prescribes, and
unless it is just an obvious error in writing and counting, this results in the
annulment of the decision. The conditions of the invalidity of the tax administrator shall verify the
who took the decision. ". This provision builds on the provisions of § 32
paragraph. 2. the law, according to which the basic necessities of the decision
"and the designation of the authorized tax authority) that issued the decision,
(b)), or reference number and number of the payment, the date of signature
the decision, which is the date of the decision,
(c) the exact designation of the recipient of the decision),
(d)) statement with an indication of the legislation under which it was decided, and
in the case of cash transactions, the amount and the account number of the Bank, the
which has to be paid, the amount
(e)) the time limit of performance,
f) instruction on the location, time and form of filing an appeal with the
calling attention to the possible exclusion of suspensive effect,
(g) the handwritten signature of the authorized worker) the tax administrator stating the
name, last name and features, and the imprint of the stamp with a public character ".
Furthermore, the contested provision builds on the provisions of § 32 para. 4, 5 and 6,
concerning shortcomings in the lessons of the remedies [Basic
the particulars of the decision pursuant to § 32 para. 2 (a). f). law] and its
A comparison of these provisions shows, therefore, that the ' other ' basic
formalities pursuant to § 32 para. 7. the Act whose absence in
the decision is based its annulment, all essential elements
decision pursuant to the provisions of § 32 para. 2. the law with the exception of the lessons
(b)) the applicant argues that the contested provisions of § 32 para. 7 of the law
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., as amended, is in
contrary to the article. 37 para. 3 of the Charter, according to which "all participants are
in the control's equal ".
However, as in its observations lodged a proposal to the Ministry of finance
correctly States, the principle of equality of all tax entities in tax proceedings
is expressly enshrined in the provisions of § 2 (2). 8 of the law of the Czech national
Council No. 337/1992 Coll., according to which "all tax entities are in
tax proceedings before the tax administrator the same procedural rights and obligations ".
This policy is not affected by the contested provision. Its purpose is to allow the
the issue of the invalidity of such decisions, which are devoid of any
one of the law set out the essential elements (Basic)
so it is not a decision at all. Such a decision shall
Therefore, it looks as if it was null and void, and
the certificate of its invalidity is not constitutive, but only
declaratory effect. Certificate of invalidity decision shall therefore
do not eliminate its shortcomings, but it only declares (declares)
its annulment and creates the conditions for the issuance of a new decision.
The Ministry of finance correctly argues that against this new decision
the law provides tax entity full procedural protection, including
judicial review in the administrative justice system. For these reasons,
Therefore, the Constitutional Court not identify with the objections to the complainant, odvolávajícími
the provisions of § 46 para. 5, § 40 paragraph 2. 1 and § 48 para. 12 of the law
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., that decisions on the invalidity of the validation
does not merely declaratory in nature.
The appellant is committing a mistake, if it considers that the tax may
(1) to apply the various grounds for invalidity of a decision or "under the pretext of
the alleged missing elements of the decision "is held invalid. The reasons,
for which it is possible to pronounce the invalidity of the decision, namely cannot be determined
arbitrarily, but rather only in cases exhaustively defined in the provisions of §
32 para. the Czech National Council Act No. 337/1992 Coll., which are as
the basic elements of a decision given in another place of this finding.
Only in this situation, the tax administrator may issue a certificate of invalidity
the decision, so the law does not allow arbitrary decisions on his part. If then
in this context, the complainant alleges that the contested provision
gives the ability to pronounce the annulment of the decision, without the need for
follow the provisions of the Act for a review of tax decision
or about the renewal of the control, you can only agree with the observations of the Ministry of
the Treasury, which is, in the opinion of the Constitutional Court compelling and constitutionally
The complainant further argues that (2) the tax administrator may
declared invalid "in time any term without any
limitation period ". Also in this direction is wrong. Although on its own
the provisions of § 32 para. 7. limitation period, it is not law, this
Regulation should be interpreted in the context of the other provisions. Under the provisions of
§ 47 para. the Czech National Council Act No. 337/1992 Coll. "If this
or special Act provides otherwise, the tax cannot be levied against or doměřit or
the right to a tax deduction after the expiration of three years from the end of
the tax year in which it was obliged to file a tax return, or
reporting or in which the tax became chargeable without at the same time was
the obligation to submit a tax return or report ". Under the provisions of section 70
paragraph. 1. the law, the right to choose and enforce tax arrears
barred within six years after the year in which he became the outstanding balance
due. In the present case it is a question of an additionally assessed tax, to which the
subject to the limitation period of three years. It follows that a certificate of
the invalidity of the decision referred to in the contested provisions of § 32 para. 7 of the law
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., as amended,
cannot be given in the "time-any term", but only in the context of the
the time limits laid down by law. In other words, if in the present case
the tax administrator wanted to issue a certificate of invalidity of the impugned decision
After the statutory three-year period and made-if so, he would be no longer
then issue a new decision which app tax doměřil. After
the expiry of the three-year period, therefore, could not be impaired by legal certainty
the decision against the complainant and any implementation
resulting from the decision declared void by the complainant
received back. Even this claim of the complainant is therefore unfounded.
On the objection to the complainant, (3.) concerning the possibility of these decisions
the Court of the Constitutional Court pronounced (in agreement with the Ministry of Finance) opinion
that decision in tax proceedings, in which the missing one of the law
expressly provided for in the basic requirements, you cannot at all be considered
decision, but paakt. Certificate of invalidity of such decision
therefore has only declaratory and not constitutive nature, for
the law clearly defined cases of defects cannot be remedied by the decision or remedy
the usual remedies. If the complainant submits that (4)
the contested provisions of the cit Act makes gradual application of reasons
the invalidity of the decision, the Constitutional Court notes that it is a subjective
the view of the complainant, which is not based on specific cases of the practice;
After all, nothing like that happened not in the present case. In this way,
the argument, i.e. the questioning of possible future applications of the law, it would be
be able to challenge a number of provisions of our law, which
However, it does not mean that these provisions were at the protiústavními.
To the objection that the complainant (5) for the removal of the alleged deficiencies
the previous decision may be issued a new decision quite contrary
content, the Constitutional Court fully aligns itself with the arguments of the Ministry of
finance that the verification of the invalidity of the decision cannot be regarded as
deleting factual shortcomings of this decision is invalid, as the
This is a sound and extraordinary legal remedies. However, such a procedure
cannot be applied to paaktů; When the certificate of invalidity decisions on them
viewed as a non-existent from the beginning, and in the same case, it is necessary to
issue a new decision, against which the addressee may file a correction
resources, so that its procedural rights are not affected.
Finally, the Constitutional Court notes that most of the appellant's opposition
by its very nature is directed only against the application of the contested provisions in the
the present case, not against it. In this context,
The Constitutional Court refers to its settled case-law, according to which "in the
the situation in which certain provisions of the legislation allows for two different
interpretation, one is in accordance with constitutional laws and
the international treaties referred to in article. 10 of the Constitution, and the second is with them in the
contrary, the reason for the cancellation is not given to this provision. When the application is
the task of all State bodies to interpret the provision constitutionally
Conformal manner "(cf. e.g. find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 5/96, the constitutional
Court: a collection of findings and orders. 6, c. h. Beck, Prague, 1997, page.
203). In this context, the Chamber of Deputies and the Ministry of finance
correctly consistently state that theoretically can be every provision of the legal
the regulation applied incorrectly, IE. in conflict with constitutional provisions, but
This fact alone constitute grounds for its dissolution. Because
for these reasons, the Constitutional Court came to the conclusion that the contested provisions of §
32 para. 7 of the law of the Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., as amended by
amended, with the provision of article. 37 para. 3 of the Charter, in violation of the
It is not.
Therefore, the Constitutional Court for annulment of the provisions of § 32 para. 7 of the law
The Czech National Council No. 337/1992 Coll., on administration of taxes and fees, as amended by
amended, rejected (article 82, paragraph 1, of Act No. 182/1993 Coll.).
The President of the Constitutional Court:
JUDr. Kessler v. r.