7. 11. 2022

Judicial Protection and Fair Trial

An appeal is considered to be timely if it was filed after the expiry of the 15-day period it the appellant followed the incorrect instructions of the court on the appeal.  This is the case, if the decision does not contain any indication of the appeal, the time limit for appeal, the court before which the appeal is to be lodged, or if it contains an incorrect indication that the appeal is not admissible in these cases, an appeal may be lodged within three months.

The Constitutional Court recently addressed on incorrect instruction. 

By the Regional Court in Brno, the Regional Court admitted the modification of the application for a preliminary injunction and at the same time instructed the complainant that no appeal against that point was admissible. Although the applicant appealed against the decision of the Regional Court only for other reasons she also submitted that the Court of First Instance had allowed the modification of the original application for the preliminary injunction.

The Constitutional Court found in the past that it is the task of the Court of Appeal to fully review the decision.

In the present case, the modification of the application was however decided only in the context of the decision on preliminary injunction.  The Constitutional Court took the position that even in the case of preliminary injunctions it is desirable that the subject matter of the proceedings should be made clear before the decision itself is handed down, even though in this case it is a decision of a preliminary nature.

 According to the Constitutional Court, an appeal was ex ledge admissible thus, the petition had to fully examined, even though, the complainant did not file this due to incorrect instructions.

The Constitutional Court emphasized the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, according to which the complainant cannot be blamed for the court's failure to instruct on the appeal, if the complainant relied on it.

 Further, the Constitutional Court found that by incorrectly instructing the complainant on the appeal, the Regional Court had denied her access to the Court of Appeal and violated her right to judicial protection.

Therefore, the Constitutional Court granted the possibility of an appeal to the High Court in relation to the review of the first point of the Regional Court's decision allowing the modification of the application for a preliminary injunction.

by Jana Rechcíglová

Download

G&P Newsletter 3/2022 (PDF)

Author

Neuigkeiten & Publikationen

67. DACH - Tagung 2024 in Athen - Dagmar Junková als Pannelistin

67. DACH - Tagung 2024 in Athen - Dagmar Junková als Pannelistin

Am 2. September 2024 nimmt unsere Kollegin Dagmar Junková als Pannelistin am Panel Arbeitsrecht im Rahmen der 67. DACH - Tagung in Athen teil.

IBA Annual Conference Mexico City 2024 – Martin Holler as Sassion Co-Chair

IBA Annual Conference Mexico City 2024 – Martin Holler as Sassion Co-Chair

On 16 September 2024, Martin Holler, member of IBA Real Estate Section Advisory Board will co-chair a session on Conversion of excess office space into other property sectors at the IBA Annual Conference in Mexico City.

Team News: David Benčat New Junior Lawyer in Bratislava

Team News: David Benčat New Junior Lawyer in Bratislava

David joined our Bratislava team as junior lawyer in April 2024. Since graduating from Comenius University and University of Economics in Bratislava in 2022 he has specialized in corporate law, insolvency law and financial law.