For 11 years, a debtor blocked insolvency proceedings with objections of bias and lawsuits. The Supreme Court has confirmed: this constitutes a criminal offence. What does this mean for creditors?
Obstructive conduct by the debtor
In its ruling Ref. No. 5 Tdo 992/2025 of 28 January 2026, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of a debtor who had systematically obstructed the work of the provisional insolvency administrator for several years. As part of insolvency proceedings commenced in 2014, the defendant was ordered to submit a list of assets and liabilities, and a provisional administrator was appointed. However, the debtor failed to cooperate with her in any way – he did not communicate, did not submit the list of assets, did not disclose the state of his accounts, and denied access to the properties. At the same time, he filed a series of objections on the grounds of bias against the administrator and judges at various levels, as well as vexatious lawsuits with fabricated claims amounting to millions of crowns. The proceedings were paralysed for almost 11 years without a decision on bankruptcy being made.
The court subsequently assessed such conduct in criminal proceedings as a misdemeanour under Section 225 of the Criminal Code (breach of duty in insolvency proceedings) and imposed a fine of CZK 100,000 on the debtor.
Breach of regulations and criminal classification
The debtor’s duty to cooperate arises directly from Section 210(1) of the Insolvency Act and is created by law, not merely by a request from the insolvency administrator. In the criminal proceedings in this case, the Supreme Court confirmed that both alternatives of conduct under Section 225 of the Criminal Code had been fulfilled: obstruction (attempting to prevent the administrator from performing her duties) and gross hindrance (creating conditions requiring the administrator to expend substantially more time and resources).
The key conclusion is that the repeated abuse of procedural rights – in this case, a series of challenges on the grounds of bias – does not enjoy legal protection within the meaning of Section 8 of the Civil Code, and if its aim is to paralyse the proceedings, it may constitute a criminal offence
The benefit for creditors
The decision confirms that criminal law protects the purpose of insolvency proceedings and the interests of creditors. Obstruction by the debtor directly jeopardises the ability to identify and realise assets and reduces the extent to which claims are satisfied. Creditors should document such obstructive conduct and, where justified, file a criminal complaint under Section 225 of the Criminal Code, or coordinate such course of action with the insolvency administrator.
The recent decision of the Supreme Court sends a clear signal: the abuse of procedural rights to block insolvency proceedings is not a legitimate defence, but a criminal offence.
Source: Supreme Court
