The authorized representatives of the public may newly submit proposals for the abolition of general measures, such as zoning, which allowed the construction even though the it was rejected by public. The decision of the Supreme Administrative Court in the case Strnad horticulture in Prague 6 led to the current turnover of practice.
Lucie Hlavová from Wilson & Partners commented on this matter: “The Supreme Court has strengthened the position of the public representative, which is regulated by the Building Act and whose purpose is to enable an appropriate number of citizens of a particular county or municipality sharing a common view on a particular case in that region to gain wider and more effective participation in the urban planning process. The Court has officially acknowledged the public representative’s legal right to protect the rights of citizens by filing for a cancellation of general measures, or some part of them, on issues such as urban planning.
This is in line with a similar dispensation given some time ago to associations representing citizens, in which the Court endowed them with the right to file proposals for the cancelling of urban planning documents. At the end of the day, it would be disturbing if a legally elected public representative, authorized by at least 200 people, would not be empowered to do so, whilst an association of three people would be able to.
Overall, given the current wording of the law, this decision of the broadened Senate of the Supreme Court represents an understandable shift compared to the guiding interpretation until this point. However, it should be pointed out that for building companies, or more precisely for developers and investors, this change will be accompanied by additional complications of the permitting process. Therefore, consideration should be given to the idea of amending the current law to simplify and streamline the current procedure.”
