The National Library insists that it did not err regarding Kaplický

Prague - The National Library today rejected at the appellate court the accusation that it acted illegally in the architectural competition for its new building. According to an unfinalized April ruling, the institution must pay 1.6 million crowns, interest, and litigation costs to the HŠH architects studio for the fact that Jan Kaplický's design, which was to be disqualified for failing to meet the competition conditions, was placed ahead of their project. The appellate panel will decide next week.

Kaplický's "octopus" won the architectural competition in March 2007, but the design was never realized. HŠH architects finished third. The now-defunct studio points out, among other things, that one of the predetermined competition conditions required applicants to place the National Conservation Fund above ground, which Kaplický did not comply with. The architects unsuccessfully appealed to the anti-monopoly office several times, which repeatedly stated that it could not assess the competition because it was not announced according to the public procurement law. Therefore, they filed a lawsuit.

The District Court for Prague 1 awarded the studio 1.6 million crowns as a payment of the difference in prize money for third and second places in the competition. With delayed interest and an additional half a million for litigation costs, the total amount at that time was approximately 2.9 million. Now it would be even higher; according to the studio's lawyer Ivan Chytil, the interest after eight years of litigation has exceeded one million. "Over a million crowns just in interest, that's several thousand books. I really find this unnecessary," he pointed out today during the appellate hearing at the Prague city court.

"The defendant (National Library) did not commit any illegal act," countered the library's lawyer Petr Schlesinger. He pointed out that even if Kaplický's proposal had been disqualified, it would not have meant any automatic changes in the amount of distributed prizes. In the competition conditions, there was also a sentence stating that "at the jury's recommendation, prizes may be distributed differently." Therefore, according to the library, there is no causal connection between the admission of Kaplický's proposal to the competition and the alleged damage incurred by the HŠH studio.

What exact amount is currently at stake is unknown even to Tomáš Hradečný, the only one of the HŠH architects who arrived at the court today. "It's not about the money, it's about the principle of whether a state institution can change the binding established conditions like this," he told ČTK after the hearing. "What can I say, in the meantime our children graduated, life goes on," he agreed with the studio's lawyer in response to a question about how he views the fact that the courts have been deciding on the lawsuit for eight years now.