Abstract
The proportionality principle is one of the most important contemporary methodological guidelines for decision-making of constitutional courts. Alexy's Weight Formula is one of tools for assessment of the proporcionality.
The author attempts to elucidate the Formula as clearly as possible and subsequently apply it to a number of selected decisions of the Czech Constitutional Court. The aim of the paper is to experimentally validate the hypothesis that the Weight Formula is a practical as well as convincing instrument of balancing colliding constitutional principles.
It should also answer the question to what extent the Formula can help identify the differences in relevant opinions in the event of rational disagreement. The paper concludes the Formula does constitute an applicable instrument of constitutional argumentation.
It can be employed in the process of judicial oversight over individual breaches of basic rights as well as exercising constitutional review powers. The Formula's applicability extends even into the sphere of disputes within organic constitutional law.
The Weight Formula serves in the very least as a tool to make argumentation of constitutional courts clearer and easier to understand for the public. Among other aspects, the paper reacts to some of the criticisms which have been mounted against the Formula.