In this case, the claimant filed a lawsuit against a resolution by which the assembly of Association of Unit Owners (in Czech: â€śSVJâ€ť) decided to enter into a service agreement on a change of lifts in the house. The courts had to assess whether, in such a case, there was an "important reason" by which the law conditions the review of the SVJâ€™s decision.
The Supreme Court stated that the change of lifts is so significant that the decision on this subject-matter is reviewable by the courts.
The Supreme Court concluded that the change of lifts was, in the light of Sec. 1209 (1) of the Civil Code, a sufficiently fundamental issue to give "an important reason" for reviewing the resolution of SVJ which had decided it. In addition, the Supreme Court expressly stated that the subject of the review is not only the decision to change of lifts as such but also the decision on its specific implementation, that is the decision approving the service agreement for the change.
As a result of this decision, in the event of SVJ's decision to change of lifts, the claimant who voted against may demand to have this SVJâ€™s decision reviewed by the court. The court may, on the basis of that review, decide on the matter itself.
According to the Supreme Court, as to the seriousness, the decision to change of lifts can be compared to a decision on change of windows in the house. On the contrary, as mentioned in the August issue of AK-PS Legal News, a decision on an increase of contributions to the repair fund is not considered as such serious decision by the Supreme Court. Here, on the other hand, the Supreme Court ruled that such decision is not reviewable by the courts (except for a situation where the increase in contributions would be really extreme).
(Decision of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic from 27.6.2017, file no. 26 Cdo 2657/2016)