Justice for sale? Court fees and legal barriers in the Czech Republic

One of the fundamental principles of a democratic legal state is the right of every individual to judicial protection. This principle is not merely a political declaration; is expressly enshrined in Article 36(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, according to which everyone can claim his right in an independent and impartial court through the established procedure. In theory, therefore, judicial protection is a universal right. However, in practice, they increasingly encounter a barrier that is less visible than a formal denial of justice - the financial barrier.

The Czech court system is financed from public budgets. Citizens pay it through taxes. Nevertheless, it is a paradox of the current legal reality that the same citizens have to pay again and again if they want the court to even consider their dispute. This mechanism is enshrined in Act No. 549/1991 Coll., on court fees, which stipulates the obligation to pay court fees for the initiation of proceedings as well as for other procedural acts.

At first glance, this may appear to be a technical tool to curtail apparently bullying lawsuits. However, the reality is often different. Court fees are a real barrier to access to justice in many situations today.

This problem is most prominent in property disputes. In many cases, Czech legislation stipulates a fee as a percentage of the value of the dispute. In other words: the higher the value of the disputed property, the higher the amount the plaintiff must pay before the court can even begin to deal with his case.

Let's give a simple example. If someone inherits part of the property, but the main heir refuses to pay him his share, he has no choice but to go to court. However, paradoxically, another financial burden begins with this. In order to get hold of his own inheritance, he has to pay a court fee, which can reach tens or even hundreds of thousands of crowns, depending on the value of the dispute. In other words: the state demands a high payment from him just to be able to claim what is rightfully his.

A similar situation arises in business disputes between companies. If one company damages another, the injured company can seek compensation in court. But again, the greater the damage, the higher the court fee. Paradoxically, the most serious disputes involving millions of dollars are burdened with fees in the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of crowns.

For small entrepreneurs, family businesses or individuals, such an amount can be effectively liquidating. As a result, a peculiar distortion of the legal environment arises: the law exists on paper, but its practical application is financially out of reach for many people.

The situation becomes even more complicated when the party to the proceedings is convinced that the court made a wrong decision. The appeal procedure, which is supposed to serve as a correction mechanism against the errors of the courts of first instance, is also associated with a court fee. In other words: if the judge makes a decision contrary to the law, jurisprudence or even common sense, the participant must pay additional thousands or tens of thousands of crowns just to be able to defend against such a decision.

This system raises a fundamental question: should access to judicial error remedy be charged? And if so, where is the line between a legitimate regulatory tool and an actual limitation of the right to a fair trial?

However, the most problematic situation occurs with extraordinary remedies. The Czech legal system recognizes several of them - in particular appeals, actions for confusion and actions for retrial. These institutes are intended to remedy serious procedural or legal malpractices. However, in practice, their use encounters another obstacle: mandatory representation by a lawyer.

For example, an appeal to the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic must usually be submitted through a lawyer. Without it, the court will not consider the application at all. This means that, in addition to the court fee, the party to the proceedings must also pay the costs of legal representation, which can amount to tens of thousands of crowns.

The result is a situation where access to the highest instances of judicial protection is not only conditioned by legal arguments, but also by the participant's financial capabilities. Justice thus becomes a service that can be afforded primarily by those who have sufficient means.

It is true that the legal system contains the institution of exemption from court fees. However, the court grants such an exemption only if the participant proves that paying the fee would endanger his basic life needs. However, this mechanism does not help the middle class - people who are not poor, but at the same time do not have hundreds of thousands of crowns available for litigation.

This is where the biggest systemic problem appears. Although court fees do not formally prevent access to court, in practice they can prevent many people from filing a dispute at all. Not because they aren't right, but because they simply can't afford a lawsuit.

Such a state is in direct tension with the principle of equality before the law. If access to justice is conditioned by financial means, law ceases to be a universal instrument of protection and becomes a privilege.

Czech society should therefore open a serious debate about whether the current system of court fees really fulfills its purpose. Regulating the abuse of courts is a legitimate goal. However, a system that simultaneously discourages injured persons from defending their rights can, in its consequences, undermine the very trust in the rule of law.

Justice must not be a luxury. If the rule of law is to function, judicial protection must not only be formally guaranteed, but also realistically available. Otherwise, there is a risk that the bitter motto, which is heard more and more often among people, will come true:

law and justice in the Czech Republic are only for those who can pay for them.

It is therefore time to open a public and professional debate on the reform of the system of court fees - on their reduction, capping or on the introduction of fairer mechanisms that would prevent the financial barrier from standing between the citizen and justice.

The rule of law cannot be measured only by the quality of laws. It is primarily measured by whether an ordinary person can really get hold of his rights. If the way to court is lined with thousands and hundreds of thousands of fees, then an unpleasant question must be asked: Is justice in the Czech Republic really a public service - or is it slowly becoming a commodity for sale?

Resources

1. Czech National Council (1991).Act No. 549/1991 Coll., on court fees.Prague: Collection of Laws of the Czech Republic. Available from:https://www.zakonyprolidi.cz/cs/1991-549

2. Křiváček, T. (2015).Court fees in civil proceedings.Prague: Charles University, Faculty of Law. Available from:https://dspace.cuni.cz

3. Djajić, S. (2025).Unlocking Justice: Access to Court and Litigation Costs Under the European Convention on Human Rights.The Age of Human Rights Journal, 24, e9282.

4. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2010).Access to Justice in Europe: An Overview of Challenges and Opportunities.Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

5. Haidar, M.V. (2024).Court Costs as an Element of the Mechanism of Ensuring Access to Justice.Visnyk National University of Internal Affairs.