Since the introduction of the institution of legal entities’ exemption from criminal liability in 2016, there has been discussion on the distribution of the burden of proof in proving the conditions for its application in criminal proceedings. Meanwhile, the prosecution’s view has been gradually changing.
The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic published its finding Ref. No. PL ÚS 25/19 that rejects the proposal of the Supreme Administrative Court to repeal Section 80 par. 1 and 2 of the Rules of Administrative Court Procedure (RACP). The Court declared that the existence of a one-year limit for the filing of an action against the inaction of an administrative body is not itself contrary to the domestic constitutional order. Concurrently, another exchange of arguments has taken place in Joštova Street. Petr Zábranský and Martin Mezenský comment on the latest findings of the Constitutional Court.
On June 10th, 2020, the so-called big conceptual amendment to the Labor Code was passed. The amendment transposes European law (the directive concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services) into the Czech legal order, primarily aiming at facilitating the establishment of employment relationships. One of the major changes introduced by the amendment, which will affect virtually every employee, with effect from 1.1.2021, is the new leave entitlement concept. This concept of leave calculation in the future should be fairer on employees, especially on those whose working hours are unevenly scheduled into shifts.
On the 30th of July 2020, or more precisely the 1st of January 2021, a long-awaited amendment to the Labor Code will come into force. Its aim is among others to facilitate the enforcement of employees’ rights, to facilitate communication between the employer and employee, to increase the flexibility of working processes or, for instance, to reduce the administrative burden of some obligations placed on the employer. The Labor Code amendment reflects a wide range of practical problems and regulates a wide range of important institutions. In this short summary, we will discuss the most significant changes that will be brought about by the amendment.
The European Commission has presented a proposal for two regulations that aim to harmonize the rules of the digital space in the European Union. The first regulation called the Digital Services Act focuses on the regulation of digital services of all kinds, and primarily protects the recipient of the services from illegal content, infringement of their consumer rights, and other risks.
The High Court of Olomouc in its decision 5 Cmo 15/2020 among other things commented on when a member of the statutory body should be held liable for their obligations to a business corporation upon a business corporation’s bankruptcy within the meaning of Section 68 of Act N. 90/2012 Coll., to regulate commercial companies and cooperatives (Business Corporations Act, hereinafter referred to as “BCA”), which regulates “punitive liability”, the aim of which is to compensate the creditors of a business corporation for deterioration in the recoverability of claims which was caused by the corporation’s bankruptcy or by a member (or former member) not exercising their office with due care, because the member failed to take all necessary and reasonably foreseeable steps to prevent the bankruptcy (even though he or she knew that the business corporation was facing an imminent threat of bankruptcy, or should and could have known it).
Electronic surveillance is regulated by Article 158d of the Rules of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter the “RoCP”), in the marginal section called “Surveillance of Persons and Items”. However, the term “electronic surveillance” itself is foreign to the RoCP, and this area is not regulated in sufficient detail on a legal level. At the same time, electronic surveillance is being used increasingly in practice and undoubtedly represents a significant intrusion into the privacy of the persons under surveillance.
A New York court has recently ruled that the depiction of Humvee vehicles manufactured by AMG in Activision games is not an infringement of intellectual property and falls under the First Amendment of the US Constitution. This may signify a radical change in game studios' approach to content licensing.
I have always been a fan of marketing and felt that there was something special about it, even back before I had any real practical experience with it. My career started at an international law firm – Hogan Lovells – where marketing was handled both centrally and locally. I became a fan of the field and learned to consider the brand as something potentially very valuable and helpful both in attracting new clients and employees and in retaining existing ones. It also showed me that marketing activities must be conducted systematically.
The District Court of Liberec as plaintiff called into question the constitutionality of Section 138 Par. 1 of the Criminal Code that determines the property damage threshold after which criminal liability arises. The Court concluded that the regulation contradicts Art. 40 Par. 6 of the Charter, which stipulates that the criminality of a fact must be determined and the punishment must be decided according to the law that is in force at the time when the crime was committed. More recent laws should be applied when it is beneficial to the offender.