Does the government bypass the crisis law? And can the damaged persons still successfully claim their damages?
Abstract
The article responds to government restrictions imposed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Initial Government Resolution promulgated pursuant to Crisis Act No. 211, published in the Collection of Laws under No. 82/2020 of 14 March 2020, restricting the retail sale of goods and services (as amended by subsequent government resolutions regulating exceptions) and Government Resolution no.
No. 215, promulgated in the Law Gazette No 85/2020 of 15 March 2020, restricting the movement of persons, expired and expired on 24 March. Instead of new similar government measures, the same restrictions were announced again, but this time by the Minister of Health in the regime of emergency measures pursuant to Act No. 258/2000 Coll., On Public Health Protection.
Specifically, it is an emergency measure of 23 March 2020 Ref. MZDR 12746 / 2020-1 / MIN / KAN - Restriction of Retail of Goods and Services including Catering in Operated Restaurants etc. and Extraordinary Measure of 23 March 2020, File no.
MZDR 12745 / 2020-1 / MIN / CAN - movement restriction. In this article, I analyze possible ways to recover damages outside the Crisis Act despite a change in the legal regime.
I also deal with the arguments why, despite the change in the regime of the said measures, the damage should be compensated on the basis of the Crisis Act. It should be noted, however, that this is not a clear description of how to succeed in a damages procedure, but rather a few theoretical reflections, where it is by no means possible to presume whether any court will accept this argument in the future.
These are arguments which should be of benefit to those who, despite uncertainty, engage in the unexplored waters of damages proceedings as a result of measures taken under both the Crisis Act and the Public Health Protection Act.