ALERT: Українці, увага! Тут ви можете знайти важливі посилання з інформацією про ваше перебування в Чеській Республіці.

Published on November 20, 2017 News

Indemnification for a delay of an administrative authority

In 2010, the Labour Office removed the complainant from the list of persons seeking employment. The decision on the removal was subsequently upheld by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. The complainant turned to court. The court then issued a decision on the date of termination of the complainant's employment. According to the court's decision, the complainant fulfilled the condition for registration in the list of persons seeking employment. The complainant therefore applied to be registered in the list of persons seeking employment. The Ministry turned his application down. It stated that the complainant had missed the deadline for filing his application.

The ombudsman commenced her inquiry into the matter and found that the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs had erred by being inactive, when it did not issue a decision on the appeal, even after the complainant's repeated request. The ombudsman considered that the Ministry's procedure was at variance with law, with the basic principles of the administrative authorities’ procedure and principles of good governance, particular with the principle of timeliness and responsibility. Pursuant to Act No. 82/1998 Coll., as amended, maladministration occurs, inter alia, if the obligation to perform an act or issue a decision within a statutory deadline or reasonable time is breached. Regarding this fact, the ombudsman recommended to the complainant to apply with the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs for appropriate satisfaction for intangible damage caused by maladministration on the Ministry's part, based on the disproportional length of the proceedings on his application for renewal of the proceedings, which the complainant did.

After more than 4 years, the Minister issued a decision on the complainant's appeal. This year, the Ministry granted the complainant satisfaction for intangible damage in the amount of CZK 66 250, which was subsequently paid to the complainant. The ombudsman therefore closed the inquiry.

Print

Back to news