Bazdirka himself refused to testify at the hearing before the Disciplinary Committee, and only through the mouth of his lawyer declared that he had a different legal opinion on this matter than the Ministry of Justice, which is why he should not be punished. On the contrary, the Ministry of Justice was convinced that Bazdirka did not respect diligence and acted with complete willfulness.
The crux of the dispute was the suspension of payment of claims under the insolvency law. Exemption from payment of claims is provided by law especially after the court has decided that the conditions for debt relief have been met.
The Regent defended himself, saying that he had not stopped the proceedings, because no one had proposed them, and the court had to do so. However, the Disciplinary Committee headed by Joseph Baksa had no understanding of such an argument.
The Constitutional Court decided that protected accounts of bankrupt persons would remain free
local
He added, “We consider the opinion of the accused to be an overreach and it could be considered a disciplinary offence. It would be ridiculous. The trustee should also monitor the insolvency proceedings.”
“The executions were not carried out quickly and efficiently, and it was understood that they could cause delays. That he had waited many months or even years before stopping the foreclosure was unreasonable inaction. He knew he had not done his homework,” Baksa added.
Podkonický executor faces disciplinary action
local
