Case law

  • Case Details
    • National ID: I.ÚS 1883/13
    • Member State: Czech Republic
    • Common Name:link
    • Decision type: Other
    • Decision date: 28/11/2013
    • Court: The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic
    • Subject:
    • Plaintiff: Unicampus, o. s.
    • Defendant: Regional Court in Prague
    • Keywords: case law, consumer, consumer rights organisation, court
  • Directive Articles
    Injunctions Directive, Article 3, (b)
  • Headnote
    The Directive 2009/22/EC should not affect the civil process law of the member states. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic stated, that it is obvious, that provisions of the Directive 2009/22/EC are not in conflict with the law of the European Union and it is not necessary to use the preliminary ruling.
  • Facts
    The defendant decided earlier in a case of plaintiff. The plaintiff stated, that the Directive 2009/22/EC was not duly implemented into Czech law system and that the current national laws are in conflict with the purpose of the Directive 2009/22/EC. The court should have used the preliminary ruling to ensure right functioning of the law of the European Union.
  • Legal issue
    The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic confirmed, that the defendant had the possibility to use the preliminary ruling, but it was not necessary, because in this case it is obvious, that there was no conflict with the Law of the European Union. The Directive 2009/22/EC does not affect the civil process law in the Czech law system.
  • Decision

    Do the provisions of the Directive 2009/22/EC affect process provisions of national laws?

    URL: http://nalus.usoud.cz/Search/GetText.aspx?sz=1-1883-13_1

    Full text: Full text

  • Related Cases

    No results available

  • Legal Literature
    • Member State: Czech Republic
    • Title: An injunction in the merits of a case in the context of Union and constitutional law
    • Author: Jan Vavrečka, Nicole Grmelová

    Czech Republic An injunction in the merits of a case in the context of Union and constitutional law Jan Vavrečka, Nicole Grmelová
  • Result
    The complaint was rejected as groundless.