How to Respond to a UOHS Investigation in the Czech Republic (step‑by‑step, 2026 Update)

Knowing how to respond to a UOHS investigation in the Czech Republic is now a front‑line compliance priority for every undertaking active on the Czech market. The Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS), the Czech Competition Authority, can issue formal information requests, launch market inquiries, conduct unannounced dawn raids, and serve statements of objections on companies, their managers, and trade associations alike. The 2026 amendment to the Competition Act substantially broadens these powers, introducing a new market‑investigation “competition tool,” a call‑in merger‑control mechanism, and enhanced manager‑level investigative instruments.

This guide sets out the complete Czech Competition Authority procedure in eight practical steps, with timelines, a required‑documents checklist, a costs table, and a dedicated section on the 2026 reform changes, giving general counsel and compliance officers a single playbook they can act on immediately.

Last reviewed: 15 June 2026, updated for the 2026 Competition Act amendment.

Overview of the Process and Who It Applies To

ÚOHS enforces the Czech Competition Act (Act No. 143/2001 Coll., as amended) and Articles 101–102 TFEU in the Czech Republic. Its enforcement actions follow a broadly common administrative procedure, but the practical steps a company must take differ depending on the type of action received. Understanding the action type is the first step in calibrating your response.

Types of ÚOHS Actions

• Information requests (requests for information, RfIs). A formal written demand requiring the addressee to provide specified documents, data, or explanations within a set deadline. This is the most common initial touchpoint and the primary focus of this guide.
• Market inquiries and the new competition tool. Under the 2026 reform, ÚOHS can open sector‑wide market investigations that do not presuppose an infringement. Affected undertakings may be asked to supply market data and to comment on draft reports during an extended public comment process.
• Dawn raids (unannounced inspections). On‑site inspections at business premises, sometimes coordinated with the European Commission. Immediate compliance is required; obstruction is a separate offence.
• Statements of objections (SoO). Issued when ÚOHS has gathered evidence of a suspected infringement and gives the undertaking a formal opportunity to respond before a decision is adopted.

These actions apply to all undertakings, domestic or foreign, whose conduct affects the Czech market, as well as to individual managers and trade associations. The 2026 amendment reinforces personal liability for managers who direct or permit anticompetitive conduct, making the response process relevant at board level. For a broader introduction to competition law practice, see the Global Law Experts directory.

Eligibility and Prerequisites, Who Must Respond

Any entity or natural person named in a ÚOHS information request is legally obliged to respond within the specified deadline. There is no minimum‑size threshold: small undertakings, sole traders, managers acting in a personal capacity, and trade associations all fall within scope. Foreign companies must respond if the request concerns conduct with effects in the Czech Republic, for example, sales to Czech customers, participation in tenders, or supply agreements with a Czech nexus.

Before engaging with ÚOHS, the addressee should secure the following internal prerequisites:

• Board / senior‑management notification. Ensure the C‑suite and, where relevant, the parent company are informed immediately.
• External competition counsel engagement. Appoint or activate a qualified competition lawyer, ideally within 24–48 hours. Consult the Czech Republic lawyers directory for specialists.
• Data‑protection and PR readiness. Coordinate with the data‑protection officer (personal data may be in scope) and prepare holding statements for media inquiries.

Step‑by‑Step Procedure: How to Respond to a UOHS Investigation

The following eight‑step procedure covers the full lifecycle of a UOHS information request, from the moment the letter arrives to long‑term remediation. Each step identifies the responsible owner and a typical duration. Adapt the sequence if your matter involves a dawn raid or statement of objections, those scenarios are addressed in Steps 7 and 8.

Step 1, Immediate Intake and Evidence Preservation (First 0–48 Hours)

The moment you receive a UOHS information request, initiate a litigation hold across all potentially responsive data. Practically, this means:

• Log receipt: record the date, delivery method, and every document received; scan and save to a secure, access‑controlled folder.
• Issue an IT preservation notice: suspend all automated deletion, archiving, or rotation policies for the data categories described in the request.
• Segregate privileged communications: instruct custodians not to forward, delete, or alter any communications with external legal counsel.
• Notify external competition counsel and instruct them to review the request within 24 hours.
• Begin a contemporaneous communications log, every substantive call, email, or meeting regarding the investigation should be recorded.

Step 2, Triage and Scope Mapping (Day 2–5)

Working with external counsel, map the scope of the request against your organisation’s data landscape:

• Identify the specific date ranges, product markets, geographic scope, and individuals (custodians) covered.
• Estimate the volume of responsive documents and data sets.
• Assign document‑collection owners for each custodian or data source.
• Flag any cross‑border data‑transfer or data‑protection issues that could delay production.

Step 3, Legal Review and Privilege Assessment (Day 3–10)

External counsel should lead a structured privilege review. Under Czech law, legal privilege protects confidential communications between a client and an external lawyer (advokát) for the purpose of providing or receiving legal advice. Industry observers note that communications with in‑house counsel and internal investigation materials may not attract the same level of protection, this remains an area of evolving practice. For each potentially privileged document:

• Create a privilege log entry: document title, date, author, recipient, and basis for the claim.
• Identify commercially sensitive information that may warrant confidentiality claims (trade secrets, customer lists).
• Prepare formal privilege claim language for inclusion in the cover letter to ÚOHS.

Step 4, Document Collection and Production (Day 7–21)

Collect responsive documents from all identified custodians and systems. Where the volume is substantial, engage a specialist e‑discovery vendor for collection, processing, and review. Ensure:

• Documents are produced in the format specified by ÚOHS (usually electronic copies; certified paper copies if expressly requested).
• Czech translations of key foreign‑language documents are prepared where the request requires them.
• A production log records every document provided, with unique identifiers.

Step 5, Draft and Send the Formal Reply (3–7 Days After Collection)

The formal reply letter should be drafted by external counsel and signed off by the general counsel. It should include: a structured response to each question or category in the request; the documents produced (referenced by index number); any privilege claims with the supporting log; any confidentiality claims; and a clear statement of cooperation.

Step 6, Request an Extension (If Needed)

If the reply deadline is insufficient, common where more than 10,000 documents are in scope, translation is required, or data resides abroad, file a reasoned extension request with ÚOHS as early as possible. Cite specific grounds: volume, cross‑border data retrieval, translation needs, or the complexity of the legal assessment. ÚOHS has discretion to grant extensions and, in practice, generally accommodates well‑reasoned requests submitted before the original deadline expires.

Step 7, Post‑Submission Follow‑Up and Record Keeping

After submission, confirm receipt with ÚOHS and request written acknowledgement. Maintain the litigation hold until the matter is formally closed. Track any supplementary requests or follow‑up questions and respond within the deadlines set. Update your internal compliance remediation plan to address any weaknesses the investigation has revealed.

Step 8, Prepare for Escalation: Statement of Objections, Dawn Raid, or Leniency

If the investigation escalates, ÚOHS issues a statement of objections, conducts a dawn raid, or indicates a cartel suspicion, the response intensifies:

• Escalate immediately to senior external litigation counsel.
• Preserve the full chain of custody for all documentary evidence.
• Activate a media / PR plan; coordinate messaging with legal counsel.
• Consider whether a leniency application, settlement, or voluntary remedial offer is appropriate. Timing is critical, coordinate with EU counsel where the conduct has a cross‑border dimension.

Required Documents and Information

ÚOHS information requests typically call for a broad range of documents. The exact scope is case‑specific, but the checklist below captures the categories most frequently demanded. Preparing these documents in advance, as part of a standing competition compliance file, significantly reduces investigation timeline pressure.

Note on legal privilege at ÚOHS: Privilege under Czech law protects communications between a client and an external lawyer (advokát) made for the purpose of legal advice. Documents created by in‑house counsel, or internal investigation reports, may not be fully protected. Always prepare a detailed privilege log and assert claims expressly in the cover letter. Where privilege is disputed, ÚOHS may seek a judicial determination.

Timeline and Key Deadlines

Deadlines in a ÚOHS investigation are case‑specific and stated in each written request. The table below provides the ranges typically encountered in practice. The 2026 reform extends the public comment window for market inquiry draft reports, giving affected parties more time, but also introducing additional procedural stages that require active engagement.

Always check the formal notice for the exact reply deadline. An extension request filed before the deadline expires is far more likely to be granted than a request filed after the deadline has passed.

Costs, Fees, and Tax Considerations

ÚOHS does not typically charge administrative fees for receiving or processing responses to information requests or market inquiries. The direct costs of responding are borne by the addressee and can vary significantly depending on the scope and complexity of the investigation.

Where an investigation reveals corrective pricing adjustments or profit restatements, involve tax and accounting counsel promptly to manage potential fiscal consequences.

What Changes in 2026: The Competition Act Reform

The 2026 amendment to the Czech Competition Act represents the most significant overhaul of the competition enforcement framework in over a decade. For companies preparing to respond to a UOHS investigation in the Czech Republic, the reform has three practical consequences that demand immediate attention.

New Market Investigation Tool and Extended Public Comment

ÚOHS gains a formal “competition tool” allowing it to open market inquiries into sectors or practices without first identifying a specific infringement. These inquiries culminate in a draft report on which affected undertakings may comment. The 2026 reform extends the public comment process, with windows commonly in the range of 30–60 calendar days. Companies should treat a market inquiry 2026 request as seriously as a traditional investigation: prepare economic and legal submissions, and engage external counsel to coordinate public comments.

Enhanced Investigative Powers and Manager Liability

The amendment equips ÚOHS with expanded investigative instruments, including a call‑in mechanism for merger control that allows the authority to require prior notification of transactions that fall below standard thresholds but raise competition concerns. Early indications suggest that ÚOHS will use this power selectively, targeting digital and technology markets. Separately, the reform strengthens the basis for imposing personal liability on individual managers who direct or permit anticompetitive conduct. Companies should update their preservation and privilege protocols to cover manager‑level communications and ensure that board members receive competition law training.

Anonymous Reporting Tool

ÚOHS launched an anonymous and confidential reporting tool for suspected competition infringements. The likely practical effect is an increase in whistleblower‑originated investigations. Companies should review and, if necessary, upgrade their internal reporting channels to ensure suspected issues are surfaced and addressed internally before a regulator complaint materialises.

Actionable steps for compliance teams:

• Revise legal‑hold templates to expressly cover “market inquiry” data categories.
• Include market‑inquiry response procedures in the competition compliance manual.
• Coordinate multi‑jurisdictional counsel where a call‑in merger review or cross‑border investigation is possible.
• Brief the board on updated manager‑liability exposure under the 2026 amendment.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

• Delayed preservation. Failing to issue an immediate litigation hold risks the destruction or alteration of responsive data, even inadvertently via automated deletion. Remedy: issue the hold within 24 hours of receipt and confirm in writing with IT.
• Over‑redaction or withholding non‑privileged documents. Blanket redactions without proper justification undermine credibility and may prompt ÚOHS to escalate. Remedy: produce all non‑privileged responsive documents and support any redactions with a detailed privilege log.
• Failing to request an extension early. An extension filed after the deadline has lapsed is unlikely to be well received. Remedy: submit a reasoned extension request as soon as the scope assessment indicates the deadline is unachievable.
• Poor coordination with foreign counsel. Cross‑border data transfers and parallel proceedings in other jurisdictions require careful management. Remedy: appoint a lead external counsel to coordinate the multi‑jurisdictional response.
• Mishandling communications with competitors. Ongoing contacts with competitors during an investigation can create the appearance of continued coordination. Remedy: log all competitor contacts and route them through external counsel for legal review.

Sources

1. Úřad pro ochranu hospodářské soutěže (ÚOHS), Official Website
2. ÚOHS, Reporting Tool for Anonymous and Confidential Reporting (Press Release)
3. ÚOHS, Legislation Page
4. Havel & Partners, Major Amendment to Competition Act (June 2026)
5. Schoenherr, Overhaul of Czech Competition Enforcement (April 2026)
6. Wolters Kluwer, Czech Competition Enforcement Facing Major Changes
7. CMS, Czech Competition Law Reform: Key Changes
8. Rowan Legal, Czech Competition Reform: New Competition Tool