CYIL vol. 10 (2019)

CYIL 10 ȍ2019Ȏ THE RIGHTS OF THE ELDERLY IN THE CASEǧLAW OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT … having acquired, within the “emancipation”, the same advantages as women – mothers. The Constitutional Court also took into account the fact that the contested regulation is not an exception from the comparatist point of view in European Union countries, except even the general trend is towards future removing the different retirement ages for men and women, which is discussed also in the Czech Republic. According to the Constitutional Court, the unequal position of men and women in the pension insurance cannot be found without a comprehensive and wisely timed regulation of the system of overall pension insurance, as well as socially acceptable and economically viable aspects which should be established rather in the context of overall reform of the pension system. Two women – judges Wagnerová and Formánková submitted a dissent opinion against the judgment, emphasising that it is desirable to balance the social position of women and men caring for children when setting the conditions of the claim for an old-age pension. They held that the judgment admitted a limitation of positively interpreted parental right of men without making a strict test for the possibilities of such limitation, even if there was a suspicion of discrimination against men based on their sex. The advantage provided by the legislature was not formulated as a reward for childbirth but for the upbringing of children. The dissenting judges also referred to the above-cited conclusions of judgment file No. Pl. ÚS 42/04 and found the received award as diverting without sufficient justification from the reasons supporting this judgment. After being unsuccessful before the Czech courts, the claimant turned to the European Court of Human Rights but even there the claimant was not successful, while the court did not found the interference with his right to property as discriminatory. 44 C. Old-age pensioners income taxation The constitutional review of the topic of special taxation of the income of old-age pensioners has already been the topic dealt with by the Constitutional Court of the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic, as described above. This subject has become relevant again in connection with legislative changes related to the austerity measures adopted in order to achieve a balanced state budget. First, the Constitutional Court dealt with the topic of claim for tax relief for working pensioners in its judgment, file No. Pl. ÚS 31/13, of 10 July 2014. 45 The amendment to the Income Tax 46 published before the end of the tax year established that the tax relief amounting to CZK 24,840 granted by law as standard would not apply to a taxpayer who receives as of 1 January of the tax period an old-age pension from the pension insurance or from the foreign compulsory insurance of the same kind. The Constitutional Court concluded that regulation thus formulated establishes inequality between taxpayers who are beneficiaries of old-age pension in the respective tax period, which is reflected in the fact that those who have this position on January 1 of the tax year always lose the whole basic tax relief, while those who find themselves in that position at any later date, perhaps even the next day, have this relief retained in full. It is not essential whether they also receive an old-age pension throughout 44 Cf. the judgment on Anderle v. Czech Republic of 17 February 2011, No. 6268/08, available at https://hudoc. echr.coe.int. 45 (N 138/74 CC Coll. 141; 162/2014 Coll.). 46 Section 35ba (1) (a) of Act No. 586/1992 Coll., on income taxes, as amended following the amendment made by Act No. 500/2012 Coll., in the part following the semicolon.

261