We would like to present you some news from the field of legislation and case law from June 2024 and the preceding months. We will keep you informed of further changes in the upcoming months.
Civil law
- Protection of the subtenant as a consumer, contractual penalty
The current legal framework for residential leases is quite strict to ensure that tenants, as the weaker party, receive adequate protection. However, this does not apply as much to subleases. When negotiating a sublease agreement, the contracting parties have greater freedom and are not constrained by the protective provisions of the Civil Code that safeguard tenants, as recently confirmed by the Supreme Court (NS) in its ruling on August 20, 2024, file no. 26 Cdo 2018/2023. In practice, this is evident in a broader ability to stipulate contractual penalties in sublease agreements for violations of obligations by the subtenant. On the other hand, the NS opened the door for providing increased protection to subtenants by allowing the application of provisions regarding consumer protection. According to the NS, the provisions concerning consumer contracts can also apply to sublease agreements, but only if the sublease is concluded between a tenant acting as a business and a subtenant acting as a consumer, rather than between two non-business entities.
- Valuation of contributions to the joint marital property
The Constitutional Court (ÚS) issued a ruling on September 11, 2024, case no. Pl. ÚS 23/24, which overturned earlier conclusions regarding the valuation of property being settled within the joint marital property (SJM). The Supreme Court (NS) had held that the increase or decrease in the value of separate property contributed by one spouse to the joint property could only be taken into account if the spouses had agreed to this in advance. However, the ÚS found that by establishing such an interpretative practice, the NS had impermissibly modified the law, which is not within its purview. According to the ÚS, valuation should occur automatically, as the law does not require any prior agreement between the spouses. However, this does not exclude the possibility that, under specific factual circumstances, the courts may choose not to take valuation into account. In this case, the ÚS found no reason not to account for it, as it involved the settlement of contributions in the form of monetary proceeds from the sale of a family house in 1990, the value of which would be significantly higher today.
Criminal law
- Constitutional Court on the decision-making regarding the rights of particularly vulnerable victims
Some victims meet the legal criteria of victims of crime according to the Victims of Crime Act. Moreover, when it comes to children, seniors, persons with disabilities, or individuals who have been victims of crimes categorized as hate crimes, they are referred to as particularly vulnerable victims, to whom this law grants specific rights (e.g., the right to free legal aid and other rights aimed at preventing secondary victimization). In some cases, the status of a particularly vulnerable victim will be evident from the outset, but in other instances (typically in the case of hate crimes) it may be disputable. The Constitutional Court (ÚS) recently addressed such a situation in its ruling dated September 9, 2024, case number III. ÚS 2615/23. It concluded that if neither the indictment nor the information available at the current stage of criminal proceedings indicates that the crime was committed due to so-called bias-motivated violence, the courts may decide that the victim is not a particularly vulnerable victim and therefore cannot exercise the specific rights provided by the Victims of Crime Act. Against such a ruling, an appeal should be permissible by analogy with the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the decision that the victim is not a particularly vulnerable victim does not alter the fact that the individual still has rights as a victim in the criminal proceedings (albeit not as a particularly vulnerable one). In cases of doubt regarding whether the victim is entitled to the rights of a particularly vulnerable victim, the ÚS recommends contacting the court with a proposal for a resolution stating that such rights and status apply.
