Divorce after the 2026 amendment: End of fault-finding for marital breakdown

The District Court in Tachov recently dealt with a case that fundamentally illustrates the new approach of Czech courts to divorce proceedings following the amendment to the Civil Code effective from January 1, 2026. The decision shows how significantly the philosophy of divorce law has changed – and why everyone considering ending their marriage should be aware of it.

The case involved a couple who filed for divorce in 2025, but the court ruled on it only after the amendment came into effect. The wife stated in the petition that she and her husband had not been living together since November 2024 and that she had moved out of their shared residence with their children and personal belongings. The husband joined the petition, and both jointly declared that they considered the marriage irretrievably broken.

What the Amendment Changed in Practice

The key change lies in Section 756 of the Civil Code. Under the original legal framework valid until the end of 2025, the court had to always ascertain the causes of the marriage breakdown. In practice, this often meant lengthy and emotionally draining evidentiary proceedings to determine who contributed more to the breakdown of the marriage – who was unfaithful, who neglected the family, who behaved inappropriately. Such proceedings prolonged the suffering of both parties and often deepened mutual animosity.

The new regulation, effective from January 1, 2026, brings a fundamental shift. The court now only ascertains the existence of the marriage breakdown, not its causes. The court examines the causes of the breakdown only if the spouse who did not file the divorce petition explicitly claims that there is a reason to reject the petition. Specifically, this refers to a situation where the divorce would be contrary to the interests of a spouse who did not predominantly contribute to the breakdown by breaching marital duties and who would suffer particularly severe harm as a result of the divorce.

In the case handled by the District Court in Tachov, the husband joined the petition and raised no such objection. The court therefore proceeded according to the new legal framework and did not examine the causes of the breakdown at all. It relied on the joint assertion of both spouses that the marriage was deeply, permanently, and irretrievably broken, and granted the petition.

Why the Change is Important for Entrepreneurs and Managers

For high-net-worth clients, entrepreneurs, and managers, this change has several practical implications. Firstly, divorce proceedings are significantly accelerated and simplified, if both spouses agree on the divorce. There is no need to spend time and resources proving past grievances and the causes of the relationship's breakdown. This means less burden for all involved, including any children.

Secondly, the risk of divorce proceedings negatively impacting professional life is reduced. Less contentious proceedings mean less stress, less time spent in court, and fewer opportunities for escalated disputes that could become public or affect business relationships.

Thirdly, the change promotes an amicable separation, which is more advantageous for both parties in the long run. Especially in situations where spouses continue to collaborate in business or have shared assets requiring coordinated management, maintaining proper relations is crucial.

It is important to emphasize, however, that the new regulation does not protect a spouse who did not contribute to the breakdown any less than before. If the spouse who did not file the petition claims that the divorce is contrary to their interests and would cause them particularly severe harm, the court will examine the causes of the breakdown. This protection, however, only applies when strict conditions are met – specifically, that the spouses have been living together for at least three years.

The procedural aspect of the case is also interesting. The proceedings were initiated while the old legal framework was still in force, but the court ruled after the amendment came into effect. Act No. 268/2025 Coll. does not contain a transitional provision that would preserve the previous procedure for older proceedings. The court therefore concluded that the new regulation applies to procedural steps in ongoing proceedings from its effective date. In doing so, it applied the principle of in case of doubt, in favor of – that is, in favor of a less confrontational approach.

For those considering divorce, the case offers a clear recommendation: if reaching an agreement with the other spouse is realistic, it is worth pursuing. A joint petition or joining the other spouse's petition leads to a faster and less painful process. At the same time, it is advisable to address property settlement and potential child custody separately, ideally before the divorce itself or concurrently with it.

The decision of the Tachov District Court clearly demonstrates that Czech justice reflects modern trends in family law. The shift from fault-finding towards merely stating the fact of marital breakdown is a step towards a more humane and efficient approach to divorce proceedings. For everyone facing a similar life situation, this is undoubtedly good news.

Source: Tachov District Court, 10 C 394/2025-23