This chapter presents and analyses the position of the Slovak Republic in relation to the decisions of various human rights committees established at the universal level and their processing within the Slovak legal framework. It explains relevant clauses of the Slovak Constitution and compares several different attitudes of selected countries and their particular views on the committees, namely, decisions of the Spanish Supreme Court and the Slovak Supreme and Constitutional Courts.
{"title":"Human Rights Committees Recommendations and their Position Within Slovak Legal Order","authors":"Katarína Šmigová","doi":"10.47078/2023.2.277-293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2023.2.277-293","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter presents and analyses the position of the Slovak Republic in relation to the decisions of various human rights committees established at the universal level and their processing within the Slovak legal framework. It explains relevant clauses of the Slovak Constitution and compares several different attitudes of selected countries and their particular views on the committees, namely, decisions of the Spanish Supreme Court and the Slovak Supreme and Constitutional Courts.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"438 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140453514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Within the human rights protection system at both international and national system, there are several rights that might be and usually get into a clash of interaction if applied at the same time. One of the common examples is a clash between the right to privacy and freedom of expression. Both are important in relation to the protection of personal identity and autonomy and both concern development of every human being. Nevertheless, if there is a clash, one has to decide which one is given priority. This study aims to analyse the protection of these two rights in case of such a clash between them occurs. Since there has already been a lot of studies dealing with this clash, this study therefore limits its focus on two issues, namely first, specificities of the digital era and second, elected public figures have been identified as a particular subject of research because of a chosen specific case that has been under judicial scrutiny in Slovakia during the period of analysis of the research topic of the right to privacy in digital age. Striking a balance in which both these fundamental rights are protected is challenging, especially in the digital era. The focus is therefore given to the background and case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic when necessary to point out some specific features because of the stimulating case-law and the influence that these judicial authorities have in relation to the Slovak Republic. Finally, it is submitted that the online human rights protection should meet the same conditions as the offline one, keeping in mind all the circumstances that are typical for the digital world.
{"title":"Right to Privacy and Freedom of Expression in the Digital Era in Relation to Elected Public Figures","authors":"Katarína Šmigová","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.137-157","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.137-157","url":null,"abstract":"Within the human rights protection system at both international and national system, there are several rights that might be and usually get into a clash of interaction if applied at the same time. One of the common examples is a clash between the right to privacy and freedom of expression. Both are important in relation to the protection of personal identity and autonomy and both concern development of every human being. Nevertheless, if there is a clash, one has to decide which one is given priority. This study aims to analyse the protection of these two rights in case of such a clash between them occurs. Since there has already been a lot of studies dealing with this clash, this study therefore limits its focus on two issues, namely first, specificities of the digital era and second, elected public figures have been identified as a particular subject of research because of a chosen specific case that has been under judicial scrutiny in Slovakia during the period of analysis of the research topic of the right to privacy in digital age. Striking a balance in which both these fundamental rights are protected is challenging, especially in the digital era. The focus is therefore given to the background and case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic when necessary to point out some specific features because of the stimulating case-law and the influence that these judicial authorities have in relation to the Slovak Republic. Finally, it is submitted that the online human rights protection should meet the same conditions as the offline one, keeping in mind all the circumstances that are typical for the digital world.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126832438","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article provides a general comparison of the rules on compensation for damage caused by game in Germany, Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary. It focuses on both the scope and assessment of liability and the existence of a complementary compensation scheme for damage caused by protected species. The authors conclude that the national systems share common features but also differ in many areas. Most notably, Polish law divides the responsibility between the hunting ground user and the State, while taking into account how game numbers can be regulated (according to the hunting season). Hungarian law addresses the specific liability directly by the Civil Code, and Slovak legislation, which seems optimal, establishes the breach of a legal obligation as a prerequisite for the establishment of a compensation claim.
{"title":"Damage Caused by Game and its Compensation in Central European Countries: A Comparative Perspective","authors":"V. Vomáčka, Josef Bártů","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.183-200","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.183-200","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a general comparison of the rules on compensation for damage caused by game in Germany, Austria, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary. It focuses on both the scope and assessment of liability and the existence of a complementary compensation scheme for damage caused by protected species. The authors conclude that the national systems share common features but also differ in many areas. Most notably, Polish law divides the responsibility between the hunting ground user and the State, while taking into account how game numbers can be regulated (according to the hunting season). Hungarian law addresses the specific liability directly by the Civil Code, and Slovak legislation, which seems optimal, establishes the breach of a legal obligation as a prerequisite for the establishment of a compensation claim.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"145 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134056211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The digital transformation of the EU single market actualizes numerous issues regarding the regulation of private law relations in the digital market. The key issue is whether the digital transformation requires a complex reform of the existing rules brought by the European legislator to provide for individual rights in various private law relations in the offline market (e.g., consumer contracts, labor contracts, and contracts on the provision of services in individual economic sectors), and if that is the case, how this reform must be implemented. An answer to this question mostly depends on whether, by the existing legal instruments in the digital market, namely efficient protection and enforcement of fundamental rights, EU market freedoms and individual rights can be ensured in the same way they are protected in the offline market. This paper deals with the changes in the regulation of EU private law relations caused by the establishment of the Digital Single Market. The main aim is to consider the perspectives of the EU private law in the digital transition, and whether a different approach to the regulation of private law relations in the digital market is necessary.
{"title":"Role of Private Law for Europe’s Digital Future","authors":"Tatjana Josipović","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.27-53","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.27-53","url":null,"abstract":"The digital transformation of the EU single market actualizes numerous issues regarding the regulation of private law relations in the digital market. The key issue is whether the digital transformation requires a complex reform of the existing rules brought by the European legislator to provide for individual rights in various private law relations in the offline market (e.g., consumer contracts, labor contracts, and contracts on the provision of services in individual economic sectors), and if that is the case, how this reform must be implemented. An answer to this question mostly depends on whether, by the existing legal instruments in the digital market, namely efficient protection and enforcement of fundamental rights, EU market freedoms and individual rights can be ensured in the same way they are protected in the offline market. This paper deals with the changes in the regulation of EU private law relations caused by the establishment of the Digital Single Market. The main aim is to consider the perspectives of the EU private law in the digital transition, and whether a different approach to the regulation of private law relations in the digital market is necessary.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122838462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study examines certain aspects of privacy protection, addressing the questions of whether it is possible to consider a person’s image (most often a photograph) as part of their private life and whether the protection of privacy can be claimed in public spaces. A thorough examination of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and English case law reveals that these questions can be answered affirmatively. Certain general principles emerge from this case law, which take into account the freedom to discuss public affairs, namely, the protection of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Based on an examination of these, it seems that a connection with a matter that qualifies as a public affair justifies the protection of the freedom of the press, meaning that purely tabloid content does not enjoy such protection. This creates widespread protection for freedom of expression and freedom of the press and may also result in numerous frustrated privacy plaintiffs.
{"title":"Photographing People in Public and the Protection of Privacy","authors":"A. Koltay","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.95-113","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.95-113","url":null,"abstract":"This study examines certain aspects of privacy protection, addressing the questions of whether it is possible to consider a person’s image (most often a photograph) as part of their private life and whether the protection of privacy can be claimed in public spaces. A thorough examination of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and English case law reveals that these questions can be answered affirmatively. Certain general principles emerge from this case law, which take into account the freedom to discuss public affairs, namely, the protection of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. Based on an examination of these, it seems that a connection with a matter that qualifies as a public affair justifies the protection of the freedom of the press, meaning that purely tabloid content does not enjoy such protection. This creates widespread protection for freedom of expression and freedom of the press and may also result in numerous frustrated privacy plaintiffs.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"23 9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125666567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article presents the relationship between the protection of property and cultural heritage protection under the ECHR system. Most often, state measures aimed at the protection of cultural heritage appear to interfere with private parties’ right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. Those dissatisfied with the outcome of domestic court proceedings regarding such interferences often want to reverse unfavorable domestic court decisions by bringing their case before the ECtHR. This article outlines the relevant case law of the ECtHR, distinguishing deprivation of property cases from controls on the use of property, in accordance with the structure of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. At the same time, it demonstrates the limits of property protection and, thereby, the success of claims by applicants before the ECtHR in cases involving cultural heritage. First, the limited temporal scope of the application of the ECHR and Protocol No. 1 excludes many cultural heritage disputes from the jurisdiction of the ECtHR. Second, the applicant has to prove that (s)he has possessions as interpreted by the ECtHR; the lack of possessions bars in particular restitution claims regarding property expropriated before the ratification of the Convention. Third, cultural heritage protection is considered a legitimate aim by the ECtHR, which can justify a deprivation or restriction of the use of property. States have a wide margin of appreciation in determining whether and how they will ensure the protection of cultural heritage in public interest. In particular, the ECtHR seems to endorse policies underlying both cultural nationalism and internationalism without giving a priori preference to any of them. Finally, the application of the flexible proportionality test by the ECtHR often makes the outcome of the procedure difficult to predict.
{"title":"Right to Property and Cultural Heritage Protection in the Light of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"T. Szabados","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.159-181","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.159-181","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the relationship between the protection of property and cultural heritage protection under the ECHR system. Most often, state measures aimed at the protection of cultural heritage appear to interfere with private parties’ right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. Those dissatisfied with the outcome of domestic court proceedings regarding such interferences often want to reverse unfavorable domestic court decisions by bringing their case before the ECtHR. This article outlines the relevant case law of the ECtHR, distinguishing deprivation of property cases from controls on the use of property, in accordance with the structure of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1. At the same time, it demonstrates the limits of property protection and, thereby, the success of claims by applicants before the ECtHR in cases involving cultural heritage. First, the limited temporal scope of the application of the ECHR and Protocol No. 1 excludes many cultural heritage disputes from the jurisdiction of the ECtHR. Second, the applicant has to prove that (s)he has possessions as interpreted by the ECtHR; the lack of possessions bars in particular restitution claims regarding property expropriated before the ratification of the Convention. Third, cultural heritage protection is considered a legitimate aim by the ECtHR, which can justify a deprivation or restriction of the use of property. States have a wide margin of appreciation in determining whether and how they will ensure the protection of cultural heritage in public interest. In particular, the ECtHR seems to endorse policies underlying both cultural nationalism and internationalism without giving a priori preference to any of them. Finally, the application of the flexible proportionality test by the ECtHR often makes the outcome of the procedure difficult to predict.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116968002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Tomasz Bojanowski, Klaudia Łuniewska, A. Wróbel, Alan Kosecki
The report concerns two international scientific conferences organized by the Institute of Justice in Warsaw within the framework of the Central European Professors’ Network coordinated by Miskolc University, Central European Academy. The conferences discussed the following topics: ‘The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age – in general terms’ and ‘Content of the right to parental responsibility in the legal orders of Central and Eastern Europe – Selected Problems.’ The conferences were attended by prominent legal researchers from Central Europe, whose papers presented contribute to deeper research into the problems of law in the realities of the twenty-first century.
{"title":"Report on International Scientific Conferences: ‘The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age – in general terms’ and ‘Content of the right to parental responsibility in the legal orders of Central and Eastern Europe – Selected Problems’","authors":"Tomasz Bojanowski, Klaudia Łuniewska, A. Wróbel, Alan Kosecki","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.219-231","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.219-231","url":null,"abstract":"The report concerns two international scientific conferences organized by the Institute of Justice in Warsaw within the framework of the Central European Professors’ Network coordinated by Miskolc University, Central European Academy. The conferences discussed the following topics: ‘The Right to Privacy in the Digital Age – in general terms’ and ‘Content of the right to parental responsibility in the legal orders of Central and Eastern Europe – Selected Problems.’ The conferences were attended by prominent legal researchers from Central Europe, whose papers presented contribute to deeper research into the problems of law in the realities of the twenty-first century.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128233430","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article reflects on the ‘Yellowstone model’ of environmental conservation while considering the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/ International Council of Monuments and Sites /International Union for Conservation of Nature’s recommendation on the voluntary relocation of Maasai residents from the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) in Tanzania. While advocating for an inclusive conservation approach, it synthesizes the extent to which the relocation has affected the collective socioeconomic and cultural rights of the Maasai in the property. It discusses the concept of Yellowstone conservation model, and subsequently traces the legal background to the existence of the Maasai in the NCA. The NCA’s statuses as a UNESCO heritage site of outstanding universal value, international biosphere reserve, and a global geo-park are also canvassed in the light of multiple-land use model. It further critically discusses the practical impacts of controlling the growing Maasai population at the site through induced voluntary relocation. The authors have drawn lessons from the Inter-American human rights system on the same area of conservation. Ultimately, the article concludes with practical recommendations and proposed issues for further research on this controversial topic.
{"title":"Environment or (Collective) Human Rights: What Is More Important?","authors":"Bernd Kannowski, Cecilia Ngaiza","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.55-93","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.55-93","url":null,"abstract":"This article reflects on the ‘Yellowstone model’ of environmental conservation while considering the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)/ International Council of Monuments and Sites /International Union for Conservation of Nature’s recommendation on the voluntary relocation of Maasai residents from the Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) in Tanzania. While advocating for an inclusive conservation approach, it synthesizes the extent to which the relocation has affected the collective socioeconomic and cultural rights of the Maasai in the property. It discusses the concept of Yellowstone conservation model, and subsequently traces the legal background to the existence of the Maasai in the NCA. The NCA’s statuses as a UNESCO heritage site of outstanding universal value, international biosphere reserve, and a global geo-park are also canvassed in the light of multiple-land use model. It further critically discusses the practical impacts of controlling the growing Maasai population at the site through induced voluntary relocation. The authors have drawn lessons from the Inter-American human rights system on the same area of conservation. Ultimately, the article concludes with practical recommendations and proposed issues for further research on this controversial topic.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127489310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, the author explains that important privacy laws are not by any means absolute and unconditional. Like other rights in contemporary democratic society, they often clash with other rights (and duties), which are usually resolved by balancing. The GDPR and its direct application influence various situations (not originally and initially planned) in which requests on the basis of the right ‘to be forgotten’ cause or can cause problems for religious institutions (religious communities) when they are pressed by some citizens to implement erasure from church books and records. The author explains why this cannot be done and that religious communities cannot be treated in the same manner as business entities. Moreover, such requests can cause harm to religious freedoms and also jeopardize proper functioning of the state bodies, since in many countries, church books are not only historical but also public documents. On a theoretical level, the author examines Dworkin’s teachings on conflicting rights and values and, by using his methodology, concludes that the religious rights of citizens belong to the group of rights that require specific and more persistent protection.
{"title":"GDPR and Religious Freedoms (With Insight Into Ronald Dworkin and Competing Rights)","authors":"Vanja Savić","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.115-135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.115-135","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, the author explains that important privacy laws are not by any means absolute and unconditional. Like other rights in contemporary democratic society, they often clash with other rights (and duties), which are usually resolved by balancing. The GDPR and its direct application influence various situations (not originally and initially planned) in which requests on the basis of the right ‘to be forgotten’ cause or can cause problems for religious institutions (religious communities) when they are pressed by some citizens to implement erasure from church books and records. The author explains why this cannot be done and that religious communities cannot be treated in the same manner as business entities. Moreover, such requests can cause harm to religious freedoms and also jeopardize proper functioning of the state bodies, since in many countries, church books are not only historical but also public documents. On a theoretical level, the author examines Dworkin’s teachings on conflicting rights and values and, by using his methodology, concludes that the religious rights of citizens belong to the group of rights that require specific and more persistent protection.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"120 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131040253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article focuses on the acquisition of agricultural land in the Czech Republic. It aims to describe the topic in the context of both historical and property law. The article introduces historical context of property ownership relations and their composition. Agricultural land was nationalized by the State in the past. Therefore, after the Velvet Revolution, it was necessary to restate a significant part of state-owned property back to its original owners. Privatization and related matters form a significant part of the present analysis because it still affects the transfer of agricultural land from the State to private individuals. Historically, transfers of agricultural land have also been restricted on the basis of nationality. However, after the accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union, this restriction has gradually been lifted. Pre-emption also remains an important issue. At present, however, there is no pre-emption right in general. It affects only certain types of agricultural land, where the pre-emption right is established in favor of the State. The next part of the article deals with actual transfers of agricultural land. This part introduces the basic requirements and elements of transfers, with an emphasis on transfers of state-owned agricultural land. On behalf of the Czech Republic, agricultural land is administered by the State Land Office, which is responsible for the disposal and alienation of land. First, the article focuses on privileged transfers the land in question is transferred only to a certain circle of subjects. In the succeeding section, methods of land transfers to non-privileged entities are described.
{"title":"Acquisition of Agricultural Land in the Czech Republic","authors":"J. Hanák, Jan Leichmann","doi":"10.47078/2022.2.9-25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.47078/2022.2.9-25","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the acquisition of agricultural land in the Czech Republic. It aims to describe the topic in the context of both historical and property law. The article introduces historical context of property ownership relations and their composition. Agricultural land was nationalized by the State in the past. Therefore, after the Velvet Revolution, it was necessary to restate a significant part of state-owned property back to its original owners. Privatization and related matters form a significant part of the present analysis because it still affects the transfer of agricultural land from the State to private individuals. Historically, transfers of agricultural land have also been restricted on the basis of nationality. However, after the accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union, this restriction has gradually been lifted. Pre-emption also remains an important issue. At present, however, there is no pre-emption right in general. It affects only certain types of agricultural land, where the pre-emption right is established in favor of the State. The next part of the article deals with actual transfers of agricultural land. This part introduces the basic requirements and elements of transfers, with an emphasis on transfers of state-owned agricultural land. On behalf of the Czech Republic, agricultural land is administered by the State Land Office, which is responsible for the disposal and alienation of land. First, the article focuses on privileged transfers the land in question is transferred only to a certain circle of subjects. In the succeeding section, methods of land transfers to non-privileged entities are described.","PeriodicalId":325719,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Comparative Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114121618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：