The amendment fundamentally changes this situation – a binding opinion that prevents the issuance of a permit or consent is now considered a decision within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Code and can thus be challenged directly by an action in the administrative courts. The party to the proceedings is thus able to defend itself immediately against the negative opinion without having to wait for the subsequent decision, which was merely a formal confirmation of failure in the light of the negative opinion. In practice, this means that a negative binding opinion is directly reviewable by a court (with the possibility of declaring it unlawful) and that there is greater legal certainty for all parties, as it is not necessary to wait until a subsequent decision to review the binding opinion. However, judicial review does not apply to positive binding opinions. <\/p>\n\n
A significant change is also brought about by the amendment to Section 75(2) of<\/strong> the CCA. The court is obliged to allow the administrative authority whose action is the subject of the objection to comment on the matter. If the court finds the objection to be well-founded, it shall annul the reviewed act by a separate judgment for illegality. This strengthens the reviewability of individual acts, increases the clarity of judicial decisions and gives the court the possibility to rule on the (un)legality of individual acts by a separate operative part . In connection with this, \u00a7 78<\/strong> The CCC adds a new provision<\/strong> according to which the court shall also deliver its decision to the administrative authority whose act was the binding basis of the contested decision. Public administration authorities will thus receive direct feedback on their procedures, which may lead to an improvement in their decision-making practice. <\/p>\n\n The changes also affect the<\/strong> review of measures of a general nature<\/strong>. According to the new wording of Section 101a(1) of<\/strong> the Code of Civil Procedure, a person entitled to bring an action or other proposal in the matter may also propose the annulment of a measure of a general nature or part thereof within one year from the date of its entry into force. If the application is filed after the expiry of this time limit, the applicant may, according to the amendment to the relevant provision, propose that the court decide that the measure of general nature does not apply in the specific case. <\/p>\n\n This amendment is of fundamental importance in the field of spatial planning, because measures of a general nature are mainly spatial plans, their amendments and regulatory plans. In practice, this means that a property owner or investor whose application for a building permit is rejected by the building authority because of non-compliance with the zoning plan may now, together with a lawsuit against the rejected decision, also challenge the part of the zoning plan that prevents the use of his land and the issuance of a positive decision in the case. Thus, even after the time limit for the annulment of the zoning plan has expired, it is possible to request the court to decide that this part of the zoning plan does not apply in a particular case. This strengthens the protection of owners. At the same time, however, the possibility of defending against earlier measures is extended, which may introduce greater legal uncertainty for municipalities as the drawer of zoning plans. <\/p>\n\n Under the amendment to Section 110(2) of<\/strong> the Code of Civil Procedure, the Supreme Administrative Court is also given the possibility to decide on the merits of the action or petition itself if the conditions for such a procedure have already been met in the proceedings before the Regional Court and the results so far show that the case can be decided. This significantly shortens the proceedings and limits the principle of cassation by referring cases back to the regional courts<\/strong>. <\/p>\n\n The new paragraph 5<\/strong> then allows the Supreme Administrative Court to refer in its reasoning in similar cases only to its earlier decisions, the part of which it has taken over, thus strengthening the continuity and predictability of its decision-making practice<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n The amendment shall enter into force on 1 January 2026<\/strong>. According to the transitional provisions, the new legal regulation shall also apply to proceedings initiated before the amendment enters into force, unless otherwise expressly provided. The legal effects of acts that occurred earlier remain unaffected. Appeals lodged before the entry into force shall be dealt with in accordance with the existing rules. <\/p>\n\n Overall, the amendment to the SCC strengthens the review function of administrative courts and increases the legal certainty of the parties to proceedings. It expands the possibilities to effectively challenge administrative acts and measures of a general nature, while introducing procedural balance by giving both the administrative authorities and the drafters of measures of a general nature the opportunity to be heard in the proceedings. It gives the Supreme Administrative Court broader powers to rule on the merits, which will contribute to faster and more cost-effective handling of actions and to reducing the often inefficient principle of cassation. <\/p>\n\n The amendment to the Administrative Procedure Code (Act No. 150\/2002 Coll., hereinafter referred to as the “APC”), which entered into force in 2025, brings several significant changes aimed at strengthening the procedural rights of the parties and at speeding up and clarifying the administrative justice system. \u00a8\u00a8 One of the key innovations is the extension […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":6819,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[320,361,603,508],"tags":[347,344,332,381],"class_list":["post-6821","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-articles","category-events","category-for-you","category-our-themes","tag-law","tag-legislation","tag-property-en","tag-zoning-plan"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/m2apartners.cz\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Novela-soudniho-radu-spravniho-foto.png\")
<\/figure>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"