Legal strategy protected client from having to return a large portion of subsidy
A demand to repay a grant does not have to be final if the authority assessed an error too strictly or ignored its real impact on the project. In a specific case, ARROWS challenged the legal assessment, supplemented the evidence and achieved a significant reduction of the repayment demanded. This article explains the reasoning behind the defence and why the response should begin already during the inspection stage.
Our specialists will help you
Following the objections filed and further procedural steps, we succeeded in achieving a reassessment of the amount of the correction and a significant reduction in the payment. At the same time, the firm set up the client's internal processes so that future projects would be implemented in full compliance with subsidy rules and procurement legislation. The result was the preservation of the majority of the subsidy granted, minimization of reputational risk, and a legally stable conclusion to the proceedings without the need to return a substantial portion of the support.
Disclaimer:
The information contained in this article is for general informational purposes only and serves as a basic guide to the issue as of 2026. Although we strive for maximum accuracy, laws and their interpretation evolve over time. We are ARROWS Law Firm, a member of the Czech Bar Association (our supervisory authority), and for the maximum security of our clients, we are insured for professional liability with a limit of CZK 350,000,000. To verify the current wording of the regulations and their application to your specific situation, it is necessary to contact ARROWS Law Firm directly (consultation@arws.cz). We are not liable for any damages arising from the independent use of the information in this article without prior individual legal consultation.