The distraint immunity for state-owned heat companies is unconstitutional.
When almost three years ago, the Parliament passed the amendment to the Act on Thermal Energy which introduced the distraint immunity on the immovable property, funds, claims and other property serving for the production and distribution of heat for state-owned heating companies, several experts, then opposition and Slovak President talked about the breach of the constitution. Their opinion has become reality after the Constitutional Court ruled on Wednesday that such distraint immunity is unconstitutional. The verdict announced by the Constitutional Court pleased particularly the financial group Penta, possibly brining almost 6-year steam gas dispute, in which Cypriot company Paroplyn Holdings Limited claims over 20.5 million euros from the heating company Bratislavska Teplarenska, to an end. The government led by Robert Fico introduced the distraint immunity as a result. “We welcome the decision made by the Constitutional Court since we had regarded the amendment to the Act on Thermal Energy as an intentional interference of the Slovak government into a dispute between two companies which, moreover, has been in discrepancy with the constitutional principles of the Slovak Republic as well as EU legislation since the beginning,“ Penta’s spokesman Gabriel Toth informed the portal vEnergetike.sk.
Full story in Slovak: Kauza paroplyn nabrala nový dych
