Abstract
In both Czech and foreign case law, the "abuse of rights" principle appears to bring justice when written law does not suffice. Recently, the principle was codified for the first time by the Czech Civil Code.
Consequently, any existing theoretical ambiguity becomes highly relevant. What is abused; "rights", or "law"? "Rights", by definition, cannot be abused; or can they? And where is the difference between "abuse of rights" and "circumvention of law"? In this paper, I offer some explanations on this newly accented principle.