Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  465 / 532 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 465 / 532 Next Page
Page Background

449

STATE IMMUNITY IN JURISPRUDENCE OF CZECH COURTS

Czech courts following the ratification. Since the UN Convention will still not have

entered into force because of an insufficient number of ratifications,

132

Czech courts

will be neither required nor authorized to apply the UN Convention directly. As

discussed, pursuant to Article 10 of the Czech Constitution, international treaties

may be applied directly and have precedence only if they are binding on the Czech

Republic,

i.e.

if they are in force, which will not be the case of the UN Convention.

Similarly, the particular provision of § 2 of the 2012 Act requires the 2012 Act to

be applied within limits of relevant international treaties only if these treaties are

binding.

133

Czech courts might certainly be more inclined to refer to the UN Convention

in their reasoning, especially considering the position of the Czech government when

adopting the 2012 Act that the UNConvention reflects customary international law.

134

However, Czech courts are not obliged to follow this position. In fact, considering

the low number of ratifications of the UN Convention ten years after its adoption,

it is somewhat doubtful that it actually does represent international custom.

Additionally, even within the framework of the UN Convention, there is space for

divergent approaches and positions. In future State immunity cases, Czech courts

should primarily strive to conceptualize better and to engage with the developed

jurisprudence in other jurisdictions. This will allow them to enrich and deepen their

decision-making, as well as to promote uniform interpretations.

4. Conclusion

In 2008, the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic reversed the conceptualization

of State immunity as absolute, and in its place introduced a restrictive doctrine. In

doing so, the Supreme Court formulated the concept of so-called “functional State

immunity”: immunity of States is limited because it is functional.

While the Supreme Court generally sought to follow the international trend

in the area of State immunity, its decision displayed a relative unfamiliarity with

The Foreign Affairs Committee recommended that consent be given on 26 June 2014 and the

Convention now awaits its second reading. Resolution of the Czech Cabinet No. 208 – Consent of

the Cabinet with Ratification of the UN Convention, dated 2 April 2014, available at

https://apps

.

odok.cz/djv-agenda?p_p_id=agenda_WAR_odokkpl&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=normal&p_p_

mode=view&p_p_resource_id=downloadAttachment&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&p_p_col_

id=column-2&p_p_col_count=1&_agenda_WAR_odokkpl_attachmentPid=VPRA9HYBN2DK

(accessed on 31 July 2014). Information as of 30 September 2014;

see

the status of the ratification

procedure on the website of the Czech House of Representatives at

http://www.psp.cz/sqw/historie.

sqw?T=195&O=7.

132

The ratification by the Czech Republic will bring the number of State Parties to the Convention to

17. Pursuant to Article 30 of the UN Convention, 30 ratifications are necessary for the Convention to

enter into force.

133

Pursuant to § 2 of the 2012 Act:

“The Act shall apply within the limits set by published international

treaties, which are binding on the Czech Republic.”

134

Cf

Bříza P. et al.,

Zákon o mezinárodním právu soukromém: Komentář

, 59, who state outright, however

without much analysis, that the new law should be interpreted in light of the UN Convention.