Rent Control Case

In the early 2000s, the Czech Republic Constitutional Court determined that the existing statutory scheme authorizing rent controls in housing was unconstitutional. The Czech legislature failed to respond with additional regulations to address aspects of rental housing, creating a lack of regulatory guidance on the circumstances in which a landlord could unilaterally raise rent. R.P. (defendant) rented an apartment from T.Z. (plaintiff). T.Z. believed that under existing statutes he could raise the rent that R.P. owed him to CZK 4,839 in rent in July 2003. R.P. paid only CZK 1,171 in rent for July 2003. T.Z. brought a lawsuit against R.P. in the Prague District Court, arguing that the July 2003 rent had been underpaid by CZK 3,668. The district court denied T.Z.’s complaint, concluding that in the absence of statutory guidance specifying when rent could be increased, no rental increases were allowed. The district court agreed that CZK 1,171 was the appropriate amount of rent owed by R.P. in July 2003. T.Z. appealed, arguing that the district court, by failing to step in and remedy an unconstitutional circumstance in which rent may never be increased, had exacerbated an unconstitutional situation. The appeals court determined that the rent increase could not be allowed, because the Czech legislature had not enumerated any circumstances in which a landlord could unilaterally increase rent. Subsequently, T.Z. requested that the constitutional court review the matter.