Environmental pollution is not just a major ecological accident. It can also be illegal waste management, oil spills, exceeding emission limits, poor storage of chemicals or construction without the necessary environmental impact assessment (EIA). Violations are punishable by heavy fines, the obligation to remedy, shutting down operations and, in serious cases, criminal liability.
Quick overview
First steps make all the difference when it comes to environmental pollution – contact us early. We will review your situation, set a strategy and help you minimize the impact on your operations and reputation.
The term environment includes water, air, soil, rock environments, ecosystems and wildlife. Environmental protection is based on a number of laws – from the General Environment Act to the Water Act to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIA Act).
Environmental pollution can take different forms:
This includes chemical spills into rivers, accidents on waterways, discharges of wastewater without permits or exceeding limits. Typically, this includes operations with technology, chemical storage facilities or agricultural sites. The operator is obliged to have an emergency plan and to report the situation immediately in the event of a spill.
This may be an exceedance of emission limits, excessive dust, burning of unsuitable materials or operation without the necessary permits. It is often dealt with at manufacturing plants, paint shops, incinerators or energy sources.
For example, leakage of oil from tanks, unprotected storage of chemicals or long-term storage of hazardous substances without security.
This is one of the most common problem areas in practice. Typically, we encounter black dumps, dumping of waste outside approved facilities, transporting waste without meeting legal conditions or importing waste from abroad without the necessary permits. There is also a risk when a business formally reports a different type of waste than it actually handles, or when storage does not comply with the operating rules and permits.
Unauthorised waste management does not have to result in an administrative fine. In more serious cases, such as large-scale, repeated acts or threats to health and the environment, the matter may be classified as a criminal offence. This already carries not only high penalties, but also the risk of being banned and significant reputational consequences.
The Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIA Act) imposes an obligation on selected projects to assess their environmental impact before they are started. If the investor underestimates this step, the project may be halted or significantly delayed.
Every situation is different – and the difference between a misdemeanour and a criminal prosecution may lie in the details. Contact us. We can help you assess the risks, prepare a defense, and minimize the impact on your operations and reputation.
Environmental pollution is not just intentional. In practice, it is very often a combination of negligence, underestimation of legal obligations and a discrepancy between the actual situation and the documentation. The problem may not be dramatic at first glance – sometimes it starts as an “operational detail” that escalates into an administrative offence when inspected.
A typical situation is the storage of waste in violation of the operating rules or the issued permit. The operator has the documentation in order, but the reality in the warehouse looks different – a different type of waste, a different quantity or insufficient security. Missing or inaccurate record-keeping is also a frequent problem, but it is one of the basic control tools of the environmental authorities.
Technological accidents without an immediate response, such as a spill that is not stopped and reported in time, are also a risk. If the operator fails to comply with the reporting obligation or downplays the situation, it may significantly worsen its procedural position. Similarly for exceedances of emission limits – sometimes a technical fault, sometimes a long-term underestimation of maintenance.
An inspection by the Czech Environmental Inspectorate then compares the actual situation with the permits, operational documentation and legal requirements. It is the difference between the “paper status” and the reality that is very often the reason for sanctions.
Many people do not realise that liability can also fall on the landowner if a black dump occurs on their land and they do not actively address the situation. In practice, it often happens that someone loads waste on private land without the owner’s knowledge – typically on the edge of the village, on a former site or on a disused plot.
However, once the existence of a dump is discovered, the environmental authorities start to address who is responsible for removing the waste and remedying the situation. If the owner ignores the situation, fails to report it and does not take steps to remedy it (e.g. filing a complaint, cooperating with the authorities, securing the land), he or she may be dragged into the proceedings and bear the costs of removing the waste.
In some cases, it is not just a fine, but an obligation to pay for the disposal, which can run into hundreds of thousands or millions of crowns. A proactive approach and a quick response are therefore crucial.
Risks in construction projects are again typical for developers, investors and larger businesses. If a project is subject to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIA Act) and the investor underestimates this obligation, the construction procedure may be stopped or returned to the stage of completing the documents.
Similarly problematic is when environmental opinions are formal, outdated or insufficiently reflected in the project documentation. This can result not only in delays of months or years, but also in judicial review through legal action by the affected public or environmental associations.
The cost of financing the project, contractual penalties or loss of investors often exceeds the cost of good legal and environmental preparation at the outset by several times.
Administrative offences and fines
The most common sanction is a fine imposed by the competent authority, typically the Czech Environmental Inspectorate. The amount of fines varies according to the specific law and the severity of the violation. In addition to the fine, the following may be imposed:
In practice, it is the cost of remediation – soil remediation, water treatment or waste disposal – that tends to be the most expensive.
Criminal liability
If the conduct has a more serious impact, for example, more extensive damage, endangering human health or a significant area, it may be a criminal offence. The Criminal Code regulates, for example, damage to and endangerment of the environment or unauthorised disposal of waste.
Threats may include:
For one environmental pollution, you may be simultaneously subject to a fine with the environmental inspectorate and to criminal proceedings with the police and the prosecutor’s office – i.e. two separate proceedings with different consequences.
Hint: CEZ sued Greenpeace for misusing its advertising spot. While it found a defence in the court of first instance, the second instance court and the Supreme Court found in favour of Greenpeace.
The Czech Environmental Inspectorate (ČIŽP) monitors whether companies and individuals comply with environmental regulations. An inspection can come about for several reasons:
The inspection itself does not usually start with a fine, but with a fact-finding exercise. Inspectors will first ask for documentation – for example, operating permits, operating rules, waste records, emission reports or an emergency plan.
This is followed by a physical inspection of the site, which compares the documentation with reality. Inspectors may take photographic documentation, request explanations from those responsible and, in some cases, take water, soil or air samples for laboratory analysis.
Crucially, the inspectorate does not only assess the consequence itself (e.g. a spill), but also whether the operator had sufficient prevention mechanisms in place, kept the prescribed records and complied with reporting obligations. A common problem is the difference between what is stated in the permit or operating rules and how the operation actually operates.
If the inspectorate finds a breach of the law, it will initiate administrative proceedings. The decision on a possible fine or corrective measure is then taken. The inspected entity has the right to comment on the matter, to submit evidence, to propose additional evidence and to appeal against the decision.
An available attorney advises: The biggest mistake is trying to “fix something quickly” without properly documenting the entire process. In good faith, you clean up a warehouse, remove waste, or repair equipment – but without a record, it’s hard to prove when the correction occurred and to what extent. So record each step carefully, keep photo documentation and communicate with the authorities within the legal procedures. It is often the details and evidence, not verbal explanations, that make the difference in proceedings.
In September 2020, a massive fish kill occurred on the Bečva River after a toxic substance was released into the water. It was one of the biggest environmental accidents in the modern history of the Czech Republic. The event triggered an extensive investigation involving the police, the prosecutor’s office and the Czech Environmental Inspectorate.
An indictment was filed against Energoaqua and its director, alleging that the cyanide leak originated from their premises. The court proceedings lasted several years and the case was intensively followed by the public and the media.
In October 2023, the District Court in Vsetín ruled that Energoaqua had caused the Bečva poisoning, but criminal liability was not established to impose a penalty – the exact circumstances of the event and the direct responsibility of a specific person could not be established. He acquitted the director Havelka.
The prosecutor appealed against this judgment, but in November 2024 the Olomouc Regional Court upheld the acquittal of Director Havelka and dismissed the prosecutor’s appeal. The court stated that, despite all the evidence, it was impossible to say with certainty exactly what had happened in the company and therefore criminal liability was not fulfilled.
The case showed how difficult it is to prove liability in a water accident – especially when there are multiple potential sources of pollution in the vicinity. Regardless of the outcome, the case meant a huge reputational burden, media pressure and a lengthy court case.
The lesson: In a water accident, it is crucial to have a workable emergency plan, to respond immediately and to comply with reporting obligations. In such situations, the first hours and the quality of documentation make the difference.
The Czech Environmental Inspectorate regularly publishes cases of illegal transboundary waste shipments. One of the most publicised cases concerned the company mondeco from Přeštice, which imported waste from abroad without meeting the legal conditions and without the necessary approvals. The waste was subsequently incinerated in the Czech Republic.
ČIŽP imposed a fine of CZK 490,000 for this behaviour. In other cases, penalties can run into millions of crowns, especially for larger quantities of waste or repeated breaches of regulations.
These cases often start as administrative errors – missing notifications, incorrect classification of waste or lack of consent from the competent authority. However, the result is that the behaviour is classified as a serious breach of environmental protection regulations.
Lesson: Cross-border shipments of waste are subject to a very strict regime. A commercial contract is not enough – all notification and permitting obligations must be met.
Oil spills can occur, for example, from technology failure, tank leaks or fuel handling. One such case concerned a spill of oil into the Elbe River, for which the operator of Mondi Štětí was fined. In addition to the penalty, he had to bear the costs of the fire brigade intervention and the subsequent remediation work.
Although it may seem like a “minor accident”, the consequences are significant – intervention by the emergency services, laboratory analyses, monitoring of the flow and possible compensation for damages. The total cost will often far exceed the fine itself.
The lesson: Regular tank inspections, staff training and the availability of sorbents are significantly cheaper than dealing with the consequences of an accident and the subsequent administrative or criminal proceedings.
Tip: More and more people are going online instead of going to regular shops to make purchases. And more and more people here are choosing cheap Chinese e-shops with a wide range of products. The goods look very good at first glance, but nothing is as it may seem at first glance. Exploitation, pollution, dangerous materials and illegal practices are behind the low prices. Read more about them in our article.
Pollution can result not only in a fine, but also in the shutting down of your business, an obligation to clean up the consequences and pay for the cost of remediation – and, in serious cases, criminal prosecution. Pollution does not only mean a major environmental accident, but also illegal waste management, leakage of oil or chemicals, exceeding emission limits, poor storage of hazardous substances or construction without the necessary environmental impact assessment (EIA). Inspections are carried out mainly by the Czech Environmental Inspectorate, which compares the actual situation with the issued permits and documentation. The risk concerns not only entrepreneurs, but also the owners of the land on which a black dump is created or investors who underestimate the environmental documentation. Thus, in one case, both administrative fine and criminal proceedings may be pending at the same time, with the final costs often far exceeding the sanction itself.
Yes, there is a reporting requirement for spills of hazardous substances or other water hazards. Failure to report makes the situation worse.
It depends on the specific law and the severity. For entrepreneurs, it can run into millions of dollars.
For selected projects with a significant environmental impact, such as larger buildings or industrial projects.
Yes. Legal persons can be held criminally liable.
The complaint can be submitted electronically or in writing to the relevant inspectorate.
Our team of experienced attorneys will help you solve any legal issue. Within 24 hours we’ll evaluate your situation and suggest a step-by-step solution, including all costs. The price for this proposal is only CZK 690, and this is refunded to you when you order service from us.
Ondřej is the attorney who came up with the idea of providing legal services online. He's been earning his living through legal services for more than 10 years. He especially likes to help clients who may have given up hope in solving their legal issues at work, for example with real estate transfers or copyright licenses.
In person and online. Just choose the appropriate service or opt for an independent consultation when you are unsure.
