How to leverage the transitional period of the Construction Act before it expires on June 30, 2027

What exactly ends on June 30, 2027

The transitional provision of Act No. 283/2021 Coll., the Building Act, under Czech legislation, allows until June 30, 2027, to attach documentation prepared under previous legal regulations to an application for a building permit or a framework permit, namely project documentation, documentation for notification, documentation for a zoning decision supplemented by the specified parts, and other listed types (Section 329, Paragraph 1). This is therefore not a general deadline for the entire proceedings.

The decisive factor is the day the application is submitted. The law speaks of an application "submitted by June 30, 2027." An application submitted earlier may contain old documentation, while an application submitted later must already have documentation according to the new rules. The deadline does not depend on the issuance of the decision in any way: the building authority can decide even after June 30, 2027, provided the application was submitted on time. The authority thus does not assess when the documentation was created, but when the application was submitted, and this day must therefore be verifiable, for example, by a confirmation of submission or the date in the data box.

From this follows the basic strategy for the investor: do not focus on when the permit will be issued, but when the application will be submitted. Every month before the end of the transitional period shortens the preparation time, and therefore it is worth deciding which projects to complete under the old rules and which to prepare under the new ones straight away. The decision is both commercial and legal: the old regime saves reworking costs, but one cannot rely on a potential extension of the deadline.

A broader overview of the changes is provided in the text on what applies in building law between 2026 and 2028.

What can be submitted under the old rules and by when

The law distinguishes four situations. First, an application for a building permit or a framework permit: old documentation for notification, for the placement of a building (supplemented by architectural-building and structural-engineering solutions according to the implementing regulation), for a building or joint permit, or for infrastructure projects to a limited extent (Section 329, Paragraph 1). Second, an application for a permit to change the use of land: documentation for a decision on a change in land use (Paragraph 2).

Documentation for construction execution has a different trigger. If the execution of the construction is commenced by June 30, 2027, documentation for construction execution prepared under the previous regulations can be used (Section 329, Paragraph 3). The decisive factor is therefore the commencement of construction, not the submission of the application. A building permitted in 2026, the execution of which does not begin until 2028, can no longer use this relief.

Fourth, an application for a building demolition permit submitted by June 30, 2027: documentation of demolition work under previous regulations can be attached (Paragraph 4). The relief thus covers the entire life cycle of the project, from preparation to demolition, but a different trigger applies to each phase: submission of the application, or commencement of construction. The project plan must therefore contain a separate decisive date for each phase.

A practical example: a developer submits an application for a building permit with the old building permit documentation by June 2027, the building authority decides perhaps in 2028, and construction begins in 2029. The application was submitted on time, so the old permit documentation will stand, but the documentation for construction execution must already be new because construction was not commenced by June 30, 2027.

How the authority assesses old documentation and what happens to existing decisions

In proceedings under the new Act, the building authority reviews the documentation submitted under the transitional provision according to previous legal regulations, in particular the previous Building Act No. 183/2006 Coll. (Section 329, Paragraph 5). The investor therefore does not have to worry that the old documentation itself will be assessed by different standards than those under which it was created. However, the proceedings are conducted under the new Act, and other permit conditions are assessed according to the rules applicable in the given proceedings. The value of the transitional period is the predictability of the documentation, not a return to the old proceedings.

Earlier decisions do not expire; they transition to the new regime. A legally effective zoning decision on the placement of a building is considered a decision on a part of the matter in proceedings for a project permit, and if the project did not require a building permit or notification, directly as a permit (Section 330 of the Building Act). Legally effective building permits, joint permits, and similar decisions are considered project permits under the new Act (Section 330, Paragraph 7).

Binding opinions, consents, and decisions of the affected authorities and statements of infrastructure owners issued before the effective date of the new Act are considered supporting documents for proceedings under the new Act. The building authority does not review them and does not reassess the public interests protected by them (Section 330, Paragraph 9). For the investor, this is a time saver: previously obtained opinions generally do not need to be renewed, but it is always necessary to verify that they relate to the project in the form in which it is submitted and that they are usable for it.

An occupancy permit is considered a final inspection decision under the new Act (Section 330, Paragraph 10). For permitted projects, changes to the project before completion and final inspection are carried out by the building authority to which the competence to permit the project has transferred (Section 330, Paragraph 4). The revision of zoning decisions after the transition to the new Act is analyzed in a separate text on the revision of zoning decisions.

Three practical situations: what to do with earlier proceedings and decisions

First situation: the investor has a legally effective zoning decision on the placement of a building, but does not yet have a building permit. Under the transitional provision, the zoning decision is considered a decision on a part of the matter in proceedings for a project permit, so the investor continues with an application for a project permit under the new Act and does not start from scratch. The investor attaches documentation according to Section 329 to the application, provided it is submitted on time.

Second situation: proceedings were initiated before the effective date of the new Act. Such proceedings will be completed according to previous legal regulations (Section 330, Paragraph 1). However, if the proceedings concern a project for which a permit, other decision, or action is no longer required under the new Act, the building authority will stop the proceedings by resolution, and no appeal can be filed against this (Section 330, Paragraph 2). The investor should therefore verify for pending matters whether their project still requires a permit.

Third situation: the building was permitted before the effective date of the new Act and is being changed during execution. A change to the project before completion will be permitted and final inspection proceedings will be conducted by the building authority to which the competence to permit the project has transferred (Section 330, Paragraph 4). When making a change, the investor therefore turns to the authority according to the new jurisdiction arrangement, not necessarily the one that permitted the building. Special jurisdiction rules apply to reserved buildings and buildings related to them (Section 330, Paragraphs 3 and 4).

Decisions on changes in land use and on the division or consolidation of land receive special treatment. A legally effective zoning decision on a change in land use is considered a decision on a part of the matter in proceedings for a project permit, or as a permit, and zoning decisions on the division or consolidation of land and on a protective zone are considered decisions permitting a non-building project (Section 330, Paragraph 8). Older decisions therefore remain usable even outside classic buildings.

One common recommendation emerges from these situations: for every pending project, the investor should have a brief opinion prepared to determine which earlier decision exists, how it is assessed under Section 330, and what step follows. Such an overview takes a day and reveals projects that need to be accelerated, as well as those where nothing changes. Without it, the investor usually only learns about a problem from the building authority.

How to record documentation and decisive dates

The law does not stipulate when the old documentation must be prepared; the decisive factor is the day the application is submitted or the construction is commenced. Nevertheless, it is advisable to state for each documentation under which regulations it was created and to keep proof of the date of submission of the application. In a later dispute over which regime applies, this is the easiest evidence.

Recording decisive dates belongs in the project plan. For each project, the investor keeps three dates: when the permit application will be submitted, when the execution of the construction will be commenced, and when the demolition application will be submitted, if planned. Next to each date is a note on whether old or new documentation will be used, and the responsible person. The table takes an hour and saves months of uncertainty.

It also helps to distinguish three groups of projects: those that are close to submission, those where a substantial part of the supporting documents is missing, and those that will start only after the deadline. For the first group, submission is planned with a buffer; for the second, it is considered whether obtaining the missing documents is achievable; and for the third, documentation according to the new rules is commissioned straight away to avoid working twice. The division is updated monthly, and management receives a one-page overview.

A risk is documentation that is "almost ready." The investor expects to complete and submit it but finds that supporting documents are missing and misses the deadline. A firm decision on which projects will be submitted under the old rules helps, while the rest are started straight away under the new ones. Halfway solutions, where old documentation starts to be modified according to the new rules, make no sense. Documentation being adapted to the new regime loses the main advantage of the old one: predictable assessment according to previous rules. It then costs as much time as new documentation and does not provide the certainty of the old.

When preparing the plan, it is also useful to review the related permitting conditions of the new Act. An overview of permit conditions is summarized in the text on how the new Building Act and permit conditions work. Old documentation will only help where the application is submitted on time, and other permit conditions are assessed by the authority under the new Act.

Six steps to June 30, 2027

The first step is to list all projects in preparation and determine the phase for each: before submitting the application, before commencing construction, before demolition. The second step is to find out what documentation exists and under what regulations it was created. The third step is to decide which projects can be submitted by the deadline and which will be prepared straight away according to the new rules.

The fourth step is to set the schedule backwards from the submission date. The application must be submitted by June 30, 2027, inclusive, but the practical deadline is earlier: it is necessary to account for completeness checks, signatures, and the provision of supporting documents. The fifth step is to verify the validity and usability of previously issued opinions and decisions referred to by the project, as they are considered supporting documents under Section 330, Paragraph 9.

The sixth step is to verify, for buildings to be commenced by June 30, 2027, that the old documentation for construction execution is complete and that the commencement of construction is verifiable (Section 329, Paragraph 3). The Prague-based Czech legal team at ARROWS law firm recommends managing the entire process as a project with a single owner, as missing the deadline for one project can mean substantial reworking of the documentation.

For each decision on whether to complete a project under the old rules, management needs a one-page background document with four pieces of information: what is being submitted and when, how much reworking under the new rules costs, what risk delay represents, and who is responsible for the deadline. The document will allow for quick decisions and later proof of why the investor decided as they did. For larger projects, such a sheet is updated with every schedule change and archived with other project documentation.

Four mistakes that cost investors time and money

The first mistake is to confuse the deadline for submitting the application with the deadline for issuing the permit. The investor waits until the permit is "almost" issued and submits the application late. The price is bringing the documentation into compliance with the new rules. The prevention is to plan the submission of the application with a buffer and not rely on the decision coming sooner.

The second mistake is to rely on old documentation for construction execution without commencing construction. The permit is applied for on time, but construction does not begin by June 30, 2027, so the documentation for construction execution must be new. The prevention is to align the construction schedule with the deadline. The commencement of execution should be documented primarily by entries in the construction log and dated photo documentation of actually commenced work; a contractor's order or handover of the construction site alone may not suffice.

The third mistake is to submit an application with old documentation that has not been supplemented with mandatory parts. For zoning decisions, the law requires supplementation with architectural-building and structural-engineering solutions according to the implementing regulation. The fourth mistake is to renew previously issued opinions unnecessarily, even though they are considered supporting documents under Section 330, Paragraph 9, and the authority does not review them if they correspond to the submitted project.

Risks of a missed transitional period

Final summary

The transitional period of the Building Act ends on June 30, 2027, but is tied to the submission of the application or the commencement of construction, not to the issuance of the permit. The article showed that an application can be submitted with old documentation by this date, that the authority will assess the documentation itself according to previous regulations, and that earlier decisions transition to the new regime.

For management, this implies a clear procedure: first list the projects and determine the decisive date for each phase, then decide which can be completed under the old rules, and only then set the schedule backwards from the submission date. The reverse order leads to the investor learning about the missed deadline only when reworking the documentation.

The Czech legal team at ARROWS law firm helps developers and investors set schedules, check documentation, verify the validity of earlier decisions, and submit applications on time. Write to us at consultation@arws.cz or explore our service for real estate law.