Czech Constitutional Court: A city cannot be forced to connect a developer to the sewer network

The Czech Constitutional Court has rejected a complaint from a developer who had sought a court order forcing a municipality to allow his new project to connect to water and sewer pipes running under city-owned land. According to the court's ruling, simply owning a plot of land earmarked for development is not enough grounds to demand that neighbours — including the city itself — sacrifice their property rights for the sake of someone else's commercial project.

The case had already worked its way through the lower courts: the developer lost consecutively at the district court in Kutná Hora, the Prague regional court, and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled that no law obliges a landowner — whether a private individual or a municipality — to allow someone else's utility connections onto their land.

The city protects more than just development interests

The Supreme Court stressed that the fact the land is owned by a municipality changes nothing. The decision is entirely the city's to make, and a city's role is to safeguard not only the interests of property development but other values as well. Simply arguing "I want to build" is not sufficient, the court noted.

Judges warned that if the developer's logic were to prevail, a landowner could end up in a situation where outside parties connect to their land from every direction until a significant portion of the plot becomes "entangled in a web of pipes and cables." If a developer launches a project without first securing a proper legal basis for routing water and sewer connections, they are acting carelessly and at their own risk, the Supreme Court concluded.

Complaint to the Constitutional Court

Disagreeing with the ruling, the developer turned to the Constitutional Court, claiming violations of property rights, freedom of enterprise, and the right to judicial protection. He insisted his project complied with the local zoning plan and that connection to the utility network was essential for any such construction.

The developer argued that the law obliges the owner of water and sewer infrastructure to provide connections, but does not obligate the owner of the land where that infrastructure sits to permit the connection. According to him, this creates a "trap" that the city was exploiting. The city, for its part, explained its refusal by citing specific technical reasons and the project's non-compliance with the zoning plan.

A panel of the Constitutional Court, chaired by reporting judge Tomáš Lichovník [Langášek], found the developer's complaint manifestly unfounded and dismissed it. The court emphasised that owning a plot of land and meeting the public-law requirements for development does not in itself create a right to demand that neighbouring landowners restrict their own property rights for the sake of someone else's commercial venture.

As Judge Langášek noted, replacing the city's consent with a court ruling would amount to interference with the constitutionally guaranteed right to property, which would require a direct legislative basis. At the same time, the developer's own property rights remain entirely unaffected — his land remains in his ownership as before.

Around Prague, based on reporting by novinky.cz