How to collect debts in the Czech Republic:

Understanding why Czech debt collection differs from your home jurisdiction

Brazilian companies accustomed to their own legal environment often make costly assumptions when pursuing debts in the Czech Republic. The regulatory frameworks, court procedures, enforcement mechanisms, and timeline expectations are substantially different from what you know at home. What works in São Paulo or Rio de Janeiro may prove entirely ineffective—or even counterproductive—in Prague.

The Czech system is structured around civil law principles that emphasize written documentation, procedural formality, and mandatory pre-litigation steps.

If you simply translate your standard Brazilian demand letter and send it to a Czech debtor without understanding local requirements, you risk losing the ability to recover legal costs even if you ultimately win your case.

The difference between success and failure in Czech debt collection often hinges on seemingly minor procedural details that Brazilian companies overlook. Understanding these differences is not optional—it is essential to avoiding unnecessary expense and delay.

The lawyers at ARROWS Law Firm combine deep knowledge of the Czech legal environment with extensive experience in international and cross-border cases, allowing them to bridge the gap between Brazilian business expectations and Czech legal reality.

The Czech legal framework: Key procedural principles that apply to your claim

Before taking any action to collect your debt, you must understand the legal architecture that governs debt recovery in the Czech Republic. The primary legislation includes the Czech Civil Code (Občanský zákoník) and the Code of Civil Procedure (Občanský soudní řád). These statutes establish mandatory procedural requirements that differ meaningfully from Brazilian law.

One of the most important—and frequently overlooked—requirements is the mandatory pre-action letter, known in Czech as the předžalobní výzva . Under Section 142a of the Czech Code of Civil Procedure, a creditor must send a formal demand letter to the debtor at least seven days before filing any claim in court.

It is a legal obligation that, if not followed correctly, results in specific financial consequences: the court generally will not award you reimbursement of your legal costs, even if you win the case entirely on its merits.

For Brazilian companies, this requirement represents a significant procedural difference. In Brazil, pre-litigation demand procedures are governed by different rules and operate under different assumptions about commercial relationships. The Czech requirement is stricter, more formalized, and carries real financial penalties for non-compliance.

Many Brazilian creditors discover too late that their initial approach did not meet the legal standards required by Czech courts. Another fundamental principle that shapes Czech debt recovery is the limitation period—the maximum time within which you can enforce your claim through the courts.

The general subjective limitation period for commercial debts in the Czech Republic is three years, calculated from the date when the creditor knew, or reasonably should have known, that the debt could be claimed. This is shorter than limitation periods in some Brazilian jurisdictions and creates absolute time pressure for action.

Once the three-year period expires, Czech courts must dismiss your claim if the debtor raises the limitation defense.

There is virtually no judicial discretion to extend this period based on equity or fairness arguments in commercial disputes. The Czech system also distinguishes between undisputed claims (where the debtor simply refuses to pay but has no legal defense) and disputed claims.

This distinction creates two entirely different procedural pathways, each with different timelines, costs, and strategic considerations. Choosing the wrong pathway for your situation can result in significant additional expense and delay.

The mandatory pre-action letter: A critical first step

The předžalobní výzva is not a courtesy reminder—it is a mandatory legal procedure with documented consequences. The letter must contain specific elements, and failure to include any of them may result in the court rejecting your cost recovery claim later.

Your pre-action letter must include clear identification of both the creditor and the debtor, and a precise specification of the claim, including its legal basis, the amount owed, and the original due date.

The letter must also include a demand for performance that itemizes the principal amount, any default interest accrued, and reasonable costs incurred in pursuing recovery.

You must provide a reasonable deadline for payment (statutorily at least seven days) and a clear warning that if the debtor does not comply, you will initiate formal legal proceedings. The letter must be delivered to the debtor in a manner that provides proof of posting or receipt.

Certified mail (doporučeně), registered delivery with a delivery note (dodejka), or delivery through a Czech data box all satisfy this requirement.

For Brazilian companies without a physical presence in the Czech Republic, working with local counsel to prepare and send this letter correctly is far more cost-effective than attempting this independently.

Statute of limitations: Your three-year window

The limitation period for commercial debts is not a recommendation—it is an absolute deadline. Once three years pass from the moment the debt became enforceable (usually the due date), the Czech courts will dismiss your claim if the debtor invokes the limitation defense.

Unlike some legal systems where courts may exercise discretion, Czech law provides no exceptions based on good faith or hardship for standard commercial claims. However, this period can be interrupted and restarted under specific circumstances.

If the debtor provides a written acknowledgment of the debt ( uznání dluhu )—which must include the reason for the debt and its amount—the limitation period restarts and creates a new ten-year period within which to pursue recovery.

This explains why experienced creditors often demand written acknowledgment from debtors as part of settlement negotiations. A simple email from the debtor's representative stating "we acknowledge owing you €50,000" can, under certain conditions, serve as evidence, but a formal acknowledgment deed is legally superior.

Initiating formal court proceedings also stops the limitation period from running. However, you must initiate proceedings before the three-year period expires. Waiting until the deadline approaches is extremely risky, as administrative delays could cause your claim to be considered late.

Related questions – Legal tips on limitation periods and pre-litigation requirements

1. If my debtor admits the debt in an email, does that restart the limitation period?
A casual email may be treated as evidence, but a formal restart of the limitation period to ten years generally requires a specific legal act of acknowledgment ( uznání dluhu ). However, partial payment can also have the effect of acknowledgment for the remainder of the debt in specific circumstances. Always strive for a formal written acknowledgment.

2. Can I send the pre-action letter after the three-year period has nearly expired?
While technically permitted, this strategy is extremely risky. The pre-action letter must be sent at least seven days before you file your lawsuit. If you send it too late, you may be forced to file the lawsuit after the limitation period expires, making your claim unenforceable if the debtor raises the defense.

3. What if the debtor disputes the invoice date or when payment was due?
The limitation period runs from the date the right to claim performance could first be exercised (typically the day after the due date). If payment terms were unclear or informal, disputes can arise about when the period began. This complexity makes it essential to maintain clear, dated documentation from the inception of your business relationship.

Two pathways to recovery: Choosing the right procedure for your situation

The Czech legal system provides two primary judicial procedures for recovering monetary debts, and the choice between them significantly affects your timeline, costs, and likelihood of success. Understanding when each procedure applies—and when each becomes unavailable—is essential to your strategy.

The fast-track payment order procedure (platební rozkaz)

For undisputed monetary claims, the Czech system offers a remarkably efficient mechanism called the platební rozkaz (payment order procedure). This fast-track mechanism bypasses the need for a formal hearing and allows the court to issue a binding payment order based solely on written documentation submitted by you as the creditor.

The procedure begins with filing a formal application to the competent district court—the court in the district where the debtor is domiciled or, in some cases, where the debtor conducts business.

You submit your application together with documentary evidence that clearly supports your claim, such as signed contracts, issued invoices, and confirmed delivery notes.

This evidence must be strong and compelling. The court reviews your application and must be satisfied that your claim is justified based on the evidence you provide. This is a significant difference from some other European jurisdictions where payment order applications are processed more administratively.

Your documentation must be clear, organized, and persuasive. If the court is not convinced, the application will be rejected (or not issued), and proceedings continue as a standard hearing.

If the court is satisfied that your claim is well-founded, it issues the platební rozkaz . This order is then formally served on the debtor into their own hands. The debtor has exactly fifteen days from the date of service to either pay the full amount or file a formal objection (called an odpor ).

If the debtor takes no action within this period, the payment order automatically becomes a final, legally enforceable judgment ( pravomocné a vykonatelné rozhodnutí )—equivalent to a court verdict after a full trial.

The timeline for obtaining an enforceable title through this procedure is typically two to six months, depending on court workload and how quickly the court locates the debtor for service. This represents dramatic speed compared to ordinary civil proceedings, which often require one to three years or longer.

When the debtor objects: The transition to ordinary civil proceedings

The apparent simplicity of the payment order procedure contains a critical vulnerability. If the debtor files even an unsubstantiated objection—a simple written statement saying they contest the claim—the entire payment order is immediately cancelled. The case automatically transforms into ordinary civil proceedings ( řízení o žalobě ).

The matter moves from a document-based procedure to a full adversarial civil lawsuit with formal hearings, witness testimony, and extensive procedural requirements.

Both parties submit arguments, present evidence, call witnesses if necessary, and potentially file multiple motions and appeals. From this point forward, the case proceeds according to ordinary civil procedure rules. The timeline extends significantly.

Obtaining a final judgment in contested ordinary civil proceedings typically requires one to three years, sometimes longer depending on court congestion and the complexity of the dispute. The costs escalate correspondingly, with fees for lawyers, courts, and translations accumulating.

This explains why the initial payment order procedure, despite its vulnerability to objection, remains the preferred strategic approach for undisputed claims.

The speed and cost savings are substantial, and the majority of debtors—particularly those simply refusing to pay rather than genuinely disputing the debt—do not file objections.

Electronic payment orders: Streamlined procedure for smaller claims

For monetary claims that do not exceed CZK 1,000,000 (approximately €40,000), Czech law provides an elektronický platební rozkaz (electronic payment order procedure, or EPR) that operates similarly to the standard payment order but through strictly electronic filing.

The primary advantage is a lower court fee compared to the standard payment order (4% of the claimed amount vs. 5% for the standard procedure).

The electronic procedure requires filing through a specialized electronic system using a recognized electronic signature or via a data box, which means you must work with Czech counsel who have access to the appropriate systems. For claims exceeding CZK 1,000,000, the standard payment order procedure applies.

The European payment order: An alternative for cross-border claims

When you (as a Brazilian company) and the Czech debtor are involved in a cross-border civil or commercial matter (and assuming the Brazilian company might have an EU presence or the specific nature of the claim allows invoking EU regulations), you may consider the European Payment Order (EOP).

The court reviews the application and, if the form is completed correctly and your claim appears well-founded, issues a European Payment Order.

The debtor then has thirty days to pay or file a statement of opposition. The most significant advantage of the EOP is that if the debtor does not oppose the order, it becomes automatically enforceable throughout the European Union without requiring a separate declaration of enforceability ( exequatur ).

This means your order is enforceable in the Czech Republic and in all other EU member states without additional proceedings.

However, the EOP contains a critical risk similar to the domestic payment order. If the Czech debtor files a statement of opposition, the EOP procedure terminates, and the case typically transfers to ordinary civil proceedings under Czech law.

Related questions – Legal tips on choosing between payment order procedures

1. Should I always use the payment order procedure rather than filing a standard civil lawsuit immediately?
For undisputed claims, applying for a payment order is almost always preferable. The speed and cost savings are substantial. Only if your claim is genuinely and complexly disputed from the start might you prepare for a standard hearing immediately, though technically the filing often starts the same way.

2. If I use the European Payment Order but the debtor objects, am I worse off than if I had used the standard Czech procedure?
Both procedures carry the same risk: an objection transforms the case into ordinary Czech civil proceedings. However, the EOP offers the advantage of cross-border enforcement if successful.

3. What evidence must I submit with my payment order application?
Courts require clear documentary proof: signed contracts, issued invoices, delivery evidence (shipping documents, signed acceptance notices, customs documents), and any correspondence showing the debtor acknowledged the obligation. Witness testimony is not taken during the payment order phase; it is strictly document-based.

Cross-border considerations: Brazilian companies pursuing debts in the Czech Republic

When you, as a Brazilian company, pursue a Czech debtor, you operate within multiple legal frameworks simultaneously: Brazilian law (governing your own legal status and capacity), Czech law (governing the debt collection procedure), and European Union law (governing jurisdiction and choice of law).

Jurisdiction and choice of law in international disputes

Under European Union law (specifically, Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012, known as Brussels I bis), the Czech courts generally have jurisdiction if the defendant (your debtor) is domiciled in the Czech Republic. This means that if your debtor is a Czech company, you can sue in the Czech courts as of right.

However, your contract with the debtor may contain a choice of law clause specifying that the agreement is governed by Brazilian law, or another jurisdiction's law. If this clause exists, you face a strategic decision.

You can pursue the claim in the Czech Republic, but Czech courts will apply the substantive law specified in your contract (e.g., Brazilian Civil Code) to determine the validity of the obligation.

This involves providing the Czech court with expert opinions on Brazilian law, which adds cost and complexity. Ideally, for debts to be collected in the Czech Republic, the contract should have specified Czech law or the law of an EU member state.

If your contract specifies Brazilian jurisdiction, you might be forced to obtain a judgment in Brazil first and then seek recognition and enforcement in the Czech Republic—a lengthy two-step process.

Contact our experts

[AUTHORS 6,9]

Documentation requirements for foreign creditors

Foreign creditors face additional documentation burdens. When you file any application in a Czech court, you must generally provide certified translations of documents originally in Portuguese. The Czech judicial system requires all court filings to be in the Czech language.

Translations must generally be performed by a court-appointed interpreter ( soudní tlumočník ) registered with the Czech Ministry of Justice.

Simple translations by bilingual employees or non-certified agencies are not accepted as official versions by the courts. Additionally, when filing in a Czech court, you must prove your legal capacity. For a Brazilian company, this typically means providing a recent extract from the Brazilian commercial registry (Junta Comercial).

This document must be officially translated into Czech and, because Brazil is a party to the Apostille Convention, it must be authenticated with an Apostille to be recognized as authentic in the Czech Republic.

The lawyers at ARROWS Law Firm manage all translation requirements, document certification, and coordination with Czech authorities, ensuring these administrative hurdles do not derail your claim.

The enforcement process: Converting your judgment into actual payment

Obtaining a favorable judgment—whether through a payment order, ordinary civil proceedings, or recognition of a Brazilian judgment—represents a major legal victory. However, it is not the final step. A judgment is merely a legal document.

The real objective is converting that document into actual payment through the enforcement process, known as exekuce (execution or enforcement proceedings).

How enforcement proceedings operate

Enforcement proceedings are initiated when you file a formal enforcement motion ( exekuční návrh ) with a chosen bailiff or the court, submitting your enforceable title. The execution is conducted by a private, state-authorized bailiff ( soudní exekutor ).

Czech bailiffs possess substantial independent authority. Upon authorization by the court, the bailiff notifies the debtor of the enforcement proceeding and provides a deadline of 30 days for voluntary payment ( výzva ke splnění vymáhané povinnosti ).

Payment within this 30-day period significantly reduces the costs of execution for the debtor.

If the debtor fails to pay voluntarily within this period, the bailiff executes enforcement orders. These measures can include freezing bank accounts, deductions from wages or other income, seizing movable property (vehicles, equipment, inventory), and seizing and selling real estate.

The bailiff has access to various registries (property, vehicle, banking registers) to locate assets.

What property cannot be seized

Czech law protects certain categories of property from seizure. These include essential household items (basic furniture, clothing), medical needs, and property belonging to third parties.

The bailiff can only garnish the net income exceeding this calculated threshold.

For corporate debtors, these social protections do not apply, but the reality of empty bank accounts remains a risk.

Duration and conclusion of enforcement

Enforcement proceedings continue until the debt is paid or until it is determined the debtor is insolvent or has no assets ( zastavení exekuce pro nemajetnost ). Enforcement is also strictly impacted if the debtor enters insolvency proceedings.

Once an insolvency proceeding (bankruptcy) is formally initiated by the court, individual enforcement actions cannot be executed.

Creditors must then register their claims in the insolvency process.

The complexity of asset location and valuation

Before committing substantial resources to enforcement, you must assess whether the debtor possesses assets. Pursuing enforcement against a shell company is throwing good money after bad.

The lawyers at ARROWS Law Firm use available databases (Insolvency Register, Land Registry, Commercial Register) to perform preliminary checks on the debtor's status before recommending expensive enforcement actions.

The insolvency risk: When your debtor cannot pay

If your debtor becomes insolvent, they may enter insolvency proceedings ( insolvenční řízení ). Once the court declares bankruptcy ( úpadek ), you typically have a strict deadline of two months to file your claim application ( přihláška pohledávky ).

If you miss this two-month deadline, your claim is excluded from the insolvency proceedings and effectively extinguished for the purpose of that process.

As an unsecured creditor, you will be satisfied proportionally from the proceeds of the debtor's estate, which often results in only a fraction of the debt being recovered.

Protecting your interests: Practical strategies for Brazilian creditors

Your contract should include provisions explicitly addressing payment obligations. The Czech smluvní pokuta (contractual penalty) provision allows you to specify financial penalties for late payment. A common and generally enforceable rate is around 0.05% to 0.1% of the outstanding amount per day.

Documentation protocols: Creating enforceable evidence

Maintain clear documentation. Signed delivery notes ( dodací listy ) and written acknowledgments of debt are far superior to simple invoices. Email exchanges where the debtor promises payment can serve as evidence but are not as strong as formal deeds.

Monitoring and early intervention: Preventing escalation

Implement systematic procedures for monitoring payment status. When invoices become overdue, initiate contact immediately. If payment is not received, the mandatory pre-action letter should be sent without excessive delay to preserve your position for the three-year limitation period.

Working with local counsel: The essential partnership

The lawyers at ARROWS Law Firm regularly advise Brazilian companies on these matters, and our services are insured for damages up to CZK 400,000,000.

Executive summary for management

• Time pressure is absolute: The three-year limitation period is a hard deadline.
• Procedural compliance determines cost recovery: You must send a pre-action letter (Section 142a OSŘ) at least 7 days before filing to be eligible for cost reimbursement.
• Choice of procedure matters: Payment orders (up to 1M CZK for electronic, unlimited for standard) are faster (2-6 months) but vulnerable to objection.
• Insolvency risk: If the debtor enters insolvency, you have a strict 2-month deadline to file claims.
• Professional assistance: Procedural errors in Czech law are costly. Professional representation is standard and recommended.

Conclusion

Debt collection in the Czech Republic requires understanding a legal system substantially different from Brazilian law. The mandatory pre-action letter, the three-year limitation period, and the specific rules of the payment order procedure create complexity that international creditors frequently underestimate.

However, the Czech system also provides efficient tools when used correctly.The payment order procedure delivers enforceable titles relatively quickly compared to full trials.

The lawyers at ARROWS Law Firm have extensive experience assisting Brazilian companies. If you are struggling with unpaid invoices from Czech business partners, do not delay. Contact us at office@arws.cz.