Petr Kasík and Vlastimil Pihera comment on Constitutional Court’s ruling on squeeze-outs in Lidové noviny

They draw attention to the inconsistent justification of the cited award, which does not clearly state whether, according to the court, the absence of supervision or other defects in legal regulations constitute grounds for the conflict with the Constitution, even though only the second of the stated options would be the logical answer. They hypothesize that historical resolutions on squeeze-out must be assessed always in relation to concrete circumstances and examine whether the not-very successful legal regulation was abused in the case in question, but there was not enough space for condemnation thereof en bloc.

By way of conclusion, they state that the existing regulation of squeeze-outs, despite the absence of the Czech National Bank’s supervision, appears to conform with the Constitution with regard to the concept of the commented resolution of the Constitution Court. The whole article can be downloaded here (in Czech only)