In August 2025, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision (case no. 27 Cdo 1368/2024) concerning the obligation of registered entities to provide identifying information on beneficial owners in the register of beneficial owners. Through this decision, the Supreme Court followed the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the joined cases “WM and Sovim” and concluded that making the personal data of beneficial owners accessible to the general public constitutes a disproportionate interference with the right to respect for private life and the right to the protection of personal data as guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Under the national legal framework, namely the Act on the Register of Beneficial Owners (hereinafter the “ZESM”), legal entities and trusts (hereinafter the “obliged entities”) are required to record information about their beneficial owners – natural persons – in the register of beneficial owners. The Ministry of Justice then makes this information accessible to anyone, including the beneficial owner’s name, country of residence, year and month of birth, nationality, as well as other data specified by the Act. Incorrect or missing entries result in a discrepancy, the rectification of which may ultimately be enforced through court proceedings in discrepancy proceedings.
Overall, this constitutes an implementation of the so-called AML Directives. However, the part concerning the disclosure of data to the general public has been declared invalid by the Court of Justice of the European Union due to its incompatibility with the above-mentioned rights under Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. This change has not yet been reflected in the Czech legal system.
The Supreme Court responded to this situation by issuing the above-mentioned ruling, granting the appeal of the applicant who argued that the Czech legal regulation was in conflict with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. In line with the EU court’s reasoning, the Supreme Court stated that compliance with the obligation to provide valid information on beneficial owners interferes with the rights of beneficial owners guaranteed by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. As this situation has been caused by the inaction of the Czech legislature, which has not yet reacted to the change in EU law, it cannot be attributed to the registered entities or their beneficial owners. Consequently, missing information in the register of beneficial owners can no longer be regarded as a discrepancy under the ZESM, and the state must not compel registered entities, under the threat of sanctions, to register their beneficial owners (this decision does not concern and has no effect on statutory restrictions relating to dividend payments, voting at general meetings, etc.).
If the register of beneficial owners were to remain freely accessible to the general public without further limitation, obliged entities would lose the motivation to record their beneficial owners, and the register would ultimately lose its purpose.
Following the court decisions, the Ministry of Justice has decided, in line with other EU Member States, to restrict public access to the register of beneficial owners as of 17 December 2025. Since the forthcoming 6th AML Directive also envisages restricting access to such data in its current scope, these changes will need to be reflected in the ZESM as well.
By limiting access to the registered information, the Ministry of Justice primarily aims to preserve the purpose of the register, as conflicts with fundamental rights will no longer arise, while also restoring the procedures and sanctions envisaged by law in cases of non-compliance, which under the current situation cannot be applied, as mentioned above, such as the initiation of discrepancy proceedings.
In conclusion, it should be noted that public authorities and obliged entities under the AML Act – including, for example, banks, lawyers, real estate brokers, auditors, and tax and accounting advisors – will continue to have access to information on beneficial owners to the same extent as before. Members of the general public will, under the forthcoming amendment, be required to submit an application to the court, in which they will have to demonstrate a legitimate interest in obtaining such information.
