On the 1st of January 2026, a comprehensive amendment to the Civil Code will come into force, affecting not only divorce and custody proceedings, but also parent-child relationships and the regulation of parental responsibility. The aim of the legislation is to simplify divorce proceedings, strengthen the importance of parental agreements and, at the same time, improve the protection of minors’ rights. Although the changes cover several areas of law, they pursue a single goal: to promote amicable solutions and ensure a stable environment for children and parents.
Divorce proceedings: simplification, accelerated process and strengthening of parental agreements
The amendment significantly changes the way divorces are handled in court. Instead of a formalistic approach to examining the reasons for the breakdown of the marriage, preference is now given to agreements between the spouses. In particular, agreements on key issues of divorce are to be promoted, such as arrangements for contact with minor children or the division of property or the spouses’ living situation after the divorce. Divorce by mutual consent will become the primary form of divorce.
In divorce proceedings, a court determination of the grounds for irretrievable breakdown will no longer be necessary. If the divorce petition is filed jointly or if one spouse concurs with the other’s petition, the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage is presumed by law. A separate determination of the grounds for irretrievable breakdown will only be made if the spouse who did not file for divorce claims a particularly serious impairment and exceptional circumstances justify the maintenance of the marriage, provided that the spouses have not already been living apart for more than three years. There is no need to question both spouses; it is sufficient that the joint application or the written submissions show that there is agreement on the divorce. The minimum duration of the marriage of one year remains a prerequisite for divorce. The previous rule, according to which the spouses must have lived apart for at least six months before the divorce, is repealed.
The amendment links the divorce proceedings to the proceedings for regulating the circumstances of minor children. If the spouses have children together, the divorce proceedings will generally be combined with the custody proceedings, repeated hearings will not be necessary, and the proceedings will be less formal and less psychologically stressful overall. In justified cases, however, it will still be possible to conduct divorce and custody proceedings separately.
Court fees
The promotion of divorce by mutual consent is also reflected in the amount of court fees. The fee for filing an application for divorce by mutual consent remains at CZK 2,000; in other cases, it increases to CZK 5,000. If, during the proceedings, the parties meet the requirements for an amicable divorce and reach an agreement, the difference of CZK 3,000 will be refunded. In this way, amicable settlement is encouraged not only in advance but also during the ongoing proceedings.
Childcare and parental responsibility
Childcare
The amendment also introduces fundamental changes in the area of parental relationships with minor children. The previous distinction between sole, shared and joint custody is abolished. The new guiding principle is that both parents care for the child, provided they agree to do so, to an extent that corresponds to the family’s possibilities and the child’s needs, rather than to an extent determined by a court decision. If care is provided in accordance with a parental agreement, the court will not usually determine the amount of maintenance. However, the court’s approval of the agreement is subject to it being in the best interests of the child.
If the parents cannot agree, the court determines the extent of childcare. The decisive criterion is the welfare of the child. As part of its decision, the court can regulate contact in very specific terms, in particular the place, duration and time frame of the meetings, as well as the persons who may or may not be present at the meetings.
After a divorce, it often happens that one parent (usually the one with custody) excludes the other parent from the child’s life or restricts contact, often due to conflicts between the parents. The amendment also addresses such situations, which can affect both the child’s relationship with both parents and their psychological well-being, and introduces regulations designed to prevent such impairments as far as possible. The following regulations in particular are intended to mitigate the impact of divorce on the relationship between parents and children:
- Equal parental care
- The establishment of equal custody ensures that both parents remain on an equal footing with the child even after the divorce, regardless of which parent has primary custody of the child. The right to equal custody applies both to the child in relation to both parents and to each parent in relation to the other parent.
- Parents’ right to information about the child
- Parents are entitled to appropriate information about the child, especially if the child is being cared for by the other parent. Although the obligation to provide mutual information already existed under the previous regulation, it is now expressively enshrined in law.
- Parents’ right to indirect contact with the child
- The parents’ right includes not only personal contact but also indirect contact, e.g. telephone calls, messages or video calls. In this way, parents can continue to actively participate in the child’s life, even if the child lives with the other parent.
- Participation of the partner in the upbringing
- Regardless of the form of care, the spouse or partner of the parent with custody may participate in the upbringing of the child, provided that they live in the same household as the child.
As before, each parent remains obliged to refrain from actions that could impair the child’s relationship with the other parent. Parents must communicate with each other, cooperate, enable the other parent to provide care and prepare the child for this care.
Corporal punishment
The amendment significantly strengthens the protection of the child by expressly stipulating that upbringing must take place without any physical punishment. Physical punishment and other humiliating measures are expressly referred to in the law as an infringement of the child’s human dignity, which enjoys special protection under private law. A parenting method that includes physical punishment may be taken into account in decisions on parental custody after a divorce or when the court is considering suspending parental responsibility.
Parental responsibility
The amendment clarifies the definition of parental responsibility, particularly with regard to the type of upbringing of the child and the possible forms of contact between parents and child. The obligations of parents arising from parental responsibility are thus specified in more detail. There is also an additional ground for suspension: parental responsibility may now also be suspended if it would impair the emotional or psychological development of the child and this risk cannot be averted in any other way. In the event of suspension, the court may also determine the conditions for the parent’s contact with the child.
Maintenance
In the area of maintenance, the amendment introduces new instruments to strengthen enforceability. A new feature is the possibility of assigning a maintenance claim against payment. In addition, increased default interest is introduced for non-payment of maintenance for minor children. Overpayments will not be refunded in future; instead, there will be an appropriate reduction in further maintenance payments.
Provisional decision: new method for the swift and well-founded regulation of the child’s living circumstances
The previous system of interim measures in matters involving minors was often criticised in practice due to the combination of accelerated proceedings and insufficient information provided to the court. The amendment therefore introduces the new institute of provisional decisions, which are intended to better take into account the interests of the child and the position of both parents, avoid unilateral proposals and promote agreement between the parents.
The court may only make a provisional decision if all parties involved – including the concerned child – have been given the opportunity to comment. The child may also be heard outside the courtroom in order to reduce the stress associated with participating in a hearing. The court must first conduct at least a basic hearing of evidence and schedule a hearing or other appointment, which may, however, take place under less formal conditions.
The deadline for issuing a provisional decision is three months, which is significantly longer than the seven-day deadline for interim injunctions. Against the backdrop of the abolition of interim injunctions and their replacement by provisional decisions with longer deadlines, it is to be expected that the overall duration of proceedings may be extended. Once issued, the decision is only valid for the period absolutely necessary , but not exceeding three months; however an extension is possible. The regulation is intended to encourage parents to reach an agreement. To this end, the applicant must state in their application whether communication with the other parent about the child’s circumstances has taken place and, if not, explain the reasons for the lack of such communication. In addition, it must be stated whether the other parent has been informed of the application or why this has not been done.
In order to prevent abusive applications by parents, the applicant may only submit a new application after three months if the court has rejected the application for a temporary injunction as manifestly unfounded.
The new regulation is intended to ensure that the child’s opinion and the actual family situation are better taken into account in cases of rapid intervention. Provisional measures remain possible in principle, but only in exceptional cases, typically where there is an immediate danger to the life or health of the child. In such cases, the application is usually made by the competent social and child protection authority.
Conclusion
The 2026 amendment to family law brings fundamental changes to divorce law and the regulation of relationships with minor children. It promotes agreement between parents, simplifies court proceedings, strengthens the protection of children and takes into account the current needs of families. With the introduction of consensual divorce, the new regulations on childcare and the establishment of provisional decisions, the legislation is expected to come closer to the real needs of families and children. However, the actual impact on practice, in particular the behaviour of courts and parents, will only become apparent as the amendment is applied.
Mgr. Julie Králová