Contributed by Rowan Legal.

On September 22, 2022, CEE Legal Matters reported that Rowan Legal had advised Central Europe Industry Partners on their acquisition of a 70% stake in AMiT Holding. CEELM reached out to Rowan Legal Partner Jan Frey to learn more about the deal.

Business that considers environmental and social aspects alongside economic results and is managed in a transparent manner – this is the goal of the ESG framework, which has recently gained much attention. A survey carried out by the prestigious Czech research agency Ipsos for our law firm indicates that this is an issue that is currently being addressed by more than 75% of Czech companies and businesses. Although for the time being ESG obligations apply mainly to companies in the banking and financial sector, it is envisaged that these obligations will be extended to all large, and selected medium-sized, companies in the future. We have discovered that seemingly over half of the companies in the Czech Republic would be inclined to use the services of professionals from law firms or consultancies to implement successful ESG solutions in such a case.

Former KPMG Lawyer Romana Szutanyi has joined Rowan Legal as Head of Employment.

PwC Legal has advised AMiT Holding co-founders and co-owners Michal Prerovsky, Martin Vosahlo, and Karel Ludvik on their sale of a 70% stake in AMiT Holding to Central Europe Industry Partners. Rowan Legal advised CEIP on the acquisition.

Havel & Partners has advised IF Invest East on the acquisition of the Ostrava Airport Multimodal Park from Concens Investments. Rowan Legal and, reportedly, Svoboda & Koubkova advised the sellers.

The Russian aggression in Ukraine, raging for more than two months now, has affected the Czech Republic to a significant extent, impacting the prices of energy across all sectors. Coupled with the rising levels of inflation, the country finds itself out of balance, according to Rowan Legal Partner Jan Frey, who says it is quite hard to predict what the rest of the year will bring.

This review was prepared for Ukrainian refugees by the law firm ROWAN Legal upon request and in coordination with the international legal network Multilaw and Ukrainian law firm Arzinger. The review is as of March 11, 2022, will be updated as relevant, also Ukrainian translations will be added. The review is not a legal advice and is for informational purposes only. For updates, please follow www.multilaw.com and/or www.arzinger.ua

Former KPMG Associate Director Jan Frey has joined Rowan Legal as Partner.

Contributed by Rowan Legal.

The Czech Chamber of Deputies approved an amendment to Act No. 127/2005 Coll., on Electronic Communications (hereinafter referred to as the “ECA”), after the Czech Senate returned it earlier. The purpose of this amendment is primarily to harmonise Czech legislation with the European Electronic Communications Code. However, the amendment will also affect other areas that are not directly related to the Code. One of the most significant changes will affect anyone who operates a website or mobile application and uses statistical, analytical or advertising tools. The change is to move from the current opt-out principle for the use of cookies and similar tracking technologies to an active user consent regime, the so-called opt-in regime.

On the 10th of June 2020, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic passed a judgment in case Ref. No. 31 ICdo 36/2020, which dealt with the validity of a contract concluded between the sole proprietor of a company and the same company represented by its sole proprietor. In this case, the Supreme Court deviated from its past decisions on the issue of interpretation of the notion of manifest disruption of public order. Whereas the Supreme Court had previously interpreted the word “manifest” as expressing the degree of intensity of public disturbance, the current decision accepted that a manifest disruption of public order could be interpreted as an undoubted or unambiguous disruption of public order, without regard to the intensity of the disruption.

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.

The protection of whistle-blowers concerns persons who report the abuse of rights, illegal activity, corruption or other damage to public interests, which they found out about in the course of their work.

The most substantial changes to the BCA (effective as of 1.01.2021) will be:

The Supreme Court confirmed in a recent decision that the court can appoint an insolvency trustee as a liquidator of a legal entity that is being dissolved even without his consent. Under what conditions can the court do so and which insolvency trustee can it appoint?