Abstract
In view of the limited discretion in the national transposition of PSD2 in the Czech Republic, the first part of the chapter follows the clash between the mix of the opinions of experts, academics, and the interested public on the one hand, and the interest of legal continuity, market fairness, and equality represented by the legislator on the other hand. The main interests and concerns of the legislator were to maintain the maximum level of legal continuity and to keep the previously achieved standard of consumer protection.
While considering, and eventually rejecting various proposed ideas and suggestions, continuity was therefore the legislator's prevailing argument in the discretionary parts of PSD2. Inevitably, such approach resulted in only a limited use of the legislator's discretion.
Nevertheless, the transposition discussion raised a problem concerning microenterprises which is a concept that, with one exception, is not recognized in the Czech Republic. In this connection, in the second part of the chapter the authors present an analysis of this issue and elaborate on why the Czech legislator decided that keeping or reestablishing the category of microenterprises was against its policy, and would in the end of the day lead to an unnecessary and undesirable split in the Czech legal system.
Furthermore, the chapter provides a summary of all of the legislator's discretionary decisions, and discusses broader impacts of the newly enacted law on payments on the Czech legal system.