Abstract
In this article, the author deals with the relationship between the law and the implementing legislation. The central question of this paper is, to what extent may implementing legislation carry out the law, to which it refers, and how this implementation ought to look like, so the reservation of the law is not violated.
The author seeks answers in the case law of the Czech Constitutional Court, only to find out that the case law does not offer a satisfactory and clear interpretation. On the contrary, the Constitutional Court imposes ambiguous requirements on the law in various examples, and the executive is thus allowed a different degree of discretion in individual cases.
Thus, the principle of legal certainty is violated which in this case represents a problem not only for the recipients of legal norms but also for public authorities. Given that the literature does not deal much with this problem, the presented article attempts to solve the legal uncertainty regarding the interpretation of the reservation of the law.
First, the general rules concerning the reservation of the law are defined, while the author bases his claim on the division into fundamental rights and non-fundamental rights. After that, the text proceeds to define the criterion for the assessment of whether the secondary legislation is in accordance with the reservation of the law.
It turns out that there is not only one suitable criterion. For that reason, the reservation of the law is divided into three categories - general reservation of the law, reservation of the law in the narrower sense, qualified reservation of the law.
In addition, the special reservation of the law created by the Czech Constitutional Court is also discussed.