Abstract
Section 2 of the Czech Civil Code, but also partially Sections 3, 10 and 13, provides rules establishing the procedure in interpreting the law (by courts). It must be borne in mind in this respect that, in terms of interpretation, Czech legal theorists will probably manage to agree with one another solely on the order of interpretation methods.
However, this consensus ends once it comes to methods of interpretation, and the mutual disagreement is quite fundamental regarding the importance that should be attached to these individual methods. On the one hand, there are Aleš Gerloch and Jan Tryzna, who prefer linguistic, systematic and logical interpretation, and on the other stand Jan Wintr and Filip Melzer, who give preference to the purpose that should be pursued by the legal norm.
As a matter of fact, the rules of interpretation enshrined in the Civil Code give rise to an important question - whether this open doctrinal dispute should be authoritatively resolved through law. The explanatory memorandum on the Civil Code indicates that the legislature sides with the advocates of teleological interpretation.
However, it should not be neglected that even the provisions on interpretation form a part of the normative text and are thus, themselves, subject to interpretation. The objective of this contribution is to show alternative methods of construction of Section 2 of the Czech Civil Code and what they imply.