On 2 October 2014, the European Court of Human Rights ("ECtHR") ruled that a dawn raid conducted in 2003 by the Czech Competition Authority (the "Authority") pursuant to Czech law was contrary to the right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights ("ECHR").
In 2003, the Authority carried out a dawn raid in the premises of Delta Pakerny (the "Company"), a bakery investigated in relation to a probe into an alleged cartel in the bakery sector. During the course of the investigations, the Company's management refused to give the Authority access to various folders stored on the employees' computers on the grounds that they contained private information.
The Authority imposed a fine of € 11,500 on the Company for obstructing the investigation but that fine was subsequently annulled by a lower court on the ground that the incriminating facts alleged against the Company were not sufficiently specified. As a result, the Authority adopted a new infringement decision on the same grounds in 2006, which was upheld by the Czech courts.
Having unsuccessfully appealed against the 2006 decision and having exhausted the internal remedies available, the Company brought the case before the ECtHR arguing, inter alia, that the Authority violated the right to respect for private life under Article 8 ECHR as well as the rights to a fair trial, effective judicial protection and property.
The ECtHR held that, although the right to carry out dawn raids interferes with the Company's right to privacy, such interference can be justified provided that: (i) it is prescribed by law; (ii) it pursues a legitimate objective; and (iii) it is necessary. Regarding the last condition, the ECtHR has consistently required that sufficient guarantees against arbitrariness must be provided by the national legal system (i.e., procedural guarantees through prior judicial authorisation or through adequate court review).
In the case at hand, the ECtHR found that Article 8 ECHR had been breached as the procedural guarantees provided to the Company under Czech law were not sufficient. Specifically, Czech law did not subject dawn-raids to prior judicial authorisation and the Czech courts did not verify the grounds, scope and proportionality of the inspection. In addition, the Czech legislation did not include any provision allowing for direct challenge to the regularity of an inspection decision.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
