Penta: Court decision does not affect the permitting and building approval of Masarycka

The Supreme Administrative Court's (SAC) decision on the Prague authorities' misconduct in the proceedings on the location of the Masaryčka office building in Prague 1 does not affect the building's permit or its proper approval, Penta Real Estate announced yesterday. According to the NSS, the Prague authorities erred in permitting the construction of the buildings and did not sufficiently consider the possible participation of civic organisations in submitting comments. According to Penta, the lawsuits are just an obstruction and an effort by the writer of the Arnika complaint to raise its profile.

"The dispute over Masarycka is a prime example of how difficult it is to build anything in the Czech Republic and, conversely, how easy it is to block any construction in the long term. This is the last of five lawsuits that have been filed against the construction of the Masaryčka building in the past, and all the others have been finally dismissed. The current decision of the Supreme Administrative Court does not affect the proper permitting of the building or its proper approval, the dispute concerns only the possible participation of the plaintiff, i.e. the Arnika organisation, in earlier administrative proceedings," said Martin Lánský, spokesman for Penta Real Estate.

The litigation has been ongoing since 2020, when the Prague 1 building authority issued a zoning permit for the construction of the multifunctional building. The complex on Na Florenci Street was already subject to an environmental impact assessment in 2017, so civic organisations should have been part of the subsequent permitting process. However, according to Arnika, the investor made minor adjustments, thus avoiding both the impact assessment and the participation of associations that pointed out the negatives of the bulky construction. Arnika defended itself at the Municipal Court in Prague, but succeeded only at the Supreme Administrative Court.

According to the Supreme Administrative Court, both the municipality, which was the defendant in the proceedings before the administrative courts, and the construction office of Prague 1 were at fault. The municipality must now reconsider whether or not an impact assessment was necessary and whether the public should have participated in the building permitting process. The NSS also raised the question of whether the project was subject to the assessment procedure essentially automatically, by law, because of the nature of the construction. The Prague City Council stated that it was familiar with the judgment and the court was not yet finished with the case.

According to the developer, the Municipal Court in Prague has previously assessed and justified why Arnika should not have been a party to the administrative proceedings. Despite this, the Prague 1 building authority settled the association's objections. According to Penta, the reasons for the annulment of the decision are only a formality.

"All of the parties' arguments have long been known, so we believe that there is no substantive reason for the administrative authorities to reach different conclusions than they did originally. Even the Supreme Administrative Court does not say that Arnika should have been a party," Lánský added. Arnika said in a press release last week that nothing will be changed on the office buildings, but the ruling can be used as a basis for other disputes between citizens and associations and the authorities.

The work on the buildings with the gold facade, which were the subject of the dispute, was completed by Penta Real Estate last autumn. Construction took over two and a half years. The total investment amounted to CZK 2.5 billion.

Source: CTK