Is construction law stability a realistic goal?

The discussion was opened by KŠB partner Tomáš Sequens, who raised the fundamental question of whether the proposed changes represent a step in the right direction or a source of further complications. KŠB partner Václav Rovenský followed up by summarizing the development of construction legislation to date, noting that the original 2021 New Construction Act had the potential to significantly streamline permitting processes, but subsequent interventions fundamentally altered its operation. The currently debated amendment is already the thirteenth change to this legislation.

One of the main topics was the nature of the legislative process itself. Participants agreed that the proposed changes are being developed in a non-standard way—outside the framework of the standard comment procedure and without broader expert discussion. According to KŠB counsel Dana Jacková, such an approach increases the risk of legislative shortcomings and practical problems in applying the law.

The discussion also addressed the justification for the changes included in the latest amendment to construction law, which are proposed with the aim of fulfilling the original principle of the New Construction Act: "one office, one proceeding, one stamp." Although the concept itself was not fundamentally disputed by the participants of the expert meeting, it was repeatedly stated that its fulfillment and functionality in practice will depend on the specific setup and implementation of the final changes. A significant topic was also the impact of the proposed changes on the functioning of building authorities, including the question of the status and motivation of officials.

Practitioners also pointed out a number of potential risks that the proposal brings—from complications in the organization of construction administration and possible problems associated with the legalization of unauthorized structures to broader impacts on individual sectors, including industry and infrastructure.

There was a consensus throughout the discussion that true streamlining of construction proceedings will not be brought about by repeated conceptual amendments to construction legislation, but primarily by its stability, the digitalization of processes, and the retention of qualified experts in public administration. Without these steps, participants agreed, one cannot expect a fundamental acceleration or greater predictability of permitting proceedings.

The debate thus confirmed that the question of the stability of construction law remains open. KŠB will continue to actively contribute to the expert discussion on its development and practical functioning.