Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: 9 Ans 11/2013 - 66
    • Member State: Czech Republic
    • Common Name:link
    • Decision type: Administrative decision in appeal
    • Decision date: 09/01/2014
    • Court: Supreme Administrative Court
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff: Unicampus, o. s.
    • Defendant: Council for radio and TV broadcast
    • Keywords: consumer, consumer rights organisation, national law
  • Directive Articles
    Injunctions Directive, Article 3, (b)
  • Headnote
    The Directive 2009/22/EC was implemented duly into the Czech law system. The directive gives to the Member States different possibilities of implementation. In general the directive should not affect process principles in Member States. The main sense of the Directive 2009/22/EC is to make the protection of consumers better. This requirement was fulfilled in Czech law system.
  • Facts
    The plaintiff used an earlier legal action to impose a fine for inactivity of the defendant (the defendant as authorithy should have taken action against other subjects because of their infringement of laws againt consumers), which may have done harm to consumers. The legal action was rejected by the court of lower level, because the plaintiff was not allowed to be a participant of process. The argumentation of the plaintiff was constructed on Directive 2009/22/EC not being duly implemented into the Czech law system.
  • Legal issue
    The argumentation of the plaintiff, that the Directive 2009/22/EC was not duly implemented into Czech law system, was not correct. The court stated, that there is no possibility to use this Directive 2009/22/EC in this case. But according to the national law, the previous decision should have been considered differently, and so the decision was annulled by the Supreme Administrative Court.
  • Decision

    Was the Directive 2009/22/EC duly implemented into the Czech law system?

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature

    No results available

  • Result
    The appeal in cassation was accepted. The decision of the defendant was annulled and the case returned to the defendant for further proceedings.