16. 10. 2024

G&P Photo Contest 2024

Giese & Partner has announced a photo contest among its team members this year focusing on "Gardens and Parks".

This year's winner is photo no. 18, which was created by Radek Werich with the help of artificial intelligence, which no one knew. As the photo is beautiful and received top ranking from the team, we decided to award it a place of honor on the front of the G&P photo calendar for 2025.

Further best twelve photographs will be placed inside the calendar.

1. Markéta Havrlantová, G&P Prague (photo no. 53) / 2. Ondřej Rathouský, G&P Prague (photo no. 8) / 3. Marie Nálepová, G&P Prague (photo no. 10) / 4. Petra Blažková, G&P Prague (photo no. 14) / 5. Jana Kostěncová, G&P Prague (photo no. 6) / 6. Martin Holler, G&P Prague(photo no. 1) / 7. Jana Kněžínková, G&P Prague (photo no. 65) / 8. Martina Novotná, G&P Prague (photo no. 55) / 9. Andrea Machciniková, G&P Prague (photo no. 2) / 10. Radek Werich, G&P Prague (photo no. 37) / 11. Karolína Szturc, G&P Prague (photo no. 17) / 12. Markéta Mrázová, G&P Prague (photo no. 13)

Twenty team members participated in this year's photo contest, submitting a total of more than 300 photos. 66 photos made it to the second round.

News & Publications

G&P Photo Contest 2026

G&P Photo Contest 2026

Giese & Partner held a photo contest for team members this year with the theme "Weather Moods".

Another Success for Giese & Partner Before the European Court of Human Rights

Another Success for Giese & Partner Before the European Court of Human Rights

The European Court of Human Rights has once again confirmed the arguments presented by Giese & Partner. In a recent case, the Czech Republic acknowledged a violation of the right to a fair trial, marking another successful outcome for attorney-at-law Ondřej Rathouský before the ECtHR.

From Ankara to Brno: Why the Constitutional Court Intervened Before Deciding the NATO Dispute

From Ankara to Brno: Why the Constitutional Court Intervened Before Deciding the NATO Dispute

The Czech Constitutional Court’s interim measure secured the President’s participation in the NATO summit but left the underlying constitutional dispute unresolved. The case highlights the role of established constitutional practice when the written Constitution provides no clear answer and raises broader questions about the balance of power between the President and the Government.