References
- Act No. 218/2000 Col., on budgetary rules, as amended.
- Act No. 280/2009 Col., Tax Procedure Code, as amended.
- Act No. 134/2016 Col., on public procurements, as amended.
- Engel and Others v. The Netherlands App no 5100/71, 5101/71, 5102/71, 5354/72 et 5370/72 (ECHR, 8 June 1976).
- Bendenoun v. France App no 12547/86 (ECHR, 24 February 1994).
- Stephen Andrew Benham v. the United Kingdom App no 19380/92 (ECHR, 29 November 1994).
- Jussila v. Finland App no 73053/01 (ECHR, 23 November 2006).
- SergeyZolotukhin v. Russia App no 14939/03 (ECHR, 10 February 2009).
- Nicoleta Gheorghe v. Romania App no 23470/05 (ECHR, 3 April 2012).
- Kapetanios and Others v. Greece App no 3453/12, 42941/12 et 9028/13 (ECHR, 30 April 2015).
- A and B v. Norway App no 24130/11 et 29758/11 (ECHR, 15 November 2016).
- Willem Bastiaan van Bockel, The ne bis in idem principle in EU law. A conceptual and jurisprudential analysis(1st edn, Ipskamp Drukkers, Amsterdam 2009) 308.
- European Court of Human Rights, ‘Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Right to a fair trial (criminal limb)’ (2014)
- Kateřina Frumarová et al, Správní trestání (1st edn, Leges, Prague 2017) 400.
- Generální finanční ředitelství, ‘Dotazy a odpovědi. Odvody za porušení rozpočtové kázně’ (2013)
- Marie Karfíková et al, Teorie finančního práva a finanční vědy (1st edn, Wolters Kluwer ČR, Prague 2017) 356.
- Roman Seer and Anna Lena Wilmset al, Surcharges and Penalties in Tax Law (1st edn, IBFD, Amsterdam 2016) 854.
- Office for the Protection of Competition: ÚOHS-R370/2014/VZ-37230/2015/321/Oho.
- Opinion of advocate general Case C-489/10 Bonda [2012] ECR.
- Supreme Administrative Court:3 As 57/2004 – 39.
- Supreme Administrative Court:1 Afs 53/2013 – 33.
- Supreme Administrative Court:4 Afs 210/2014 – 70.