The retention of a driving license always has fundamental implications on the rights of a natural person and therefore cannot be excluded from judicial review by an administrative court

On October 29, 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic, by its resolution case file no. 2Stk/5/2025, annulled the resolution of the Administrative Court in Banská Bystrica (hereinafter referred to as the “Administrative Court”) rejecting the driver’s administrative action against the measure to withhold the driver’s license, and returned the case to the Administrative Court for further proceedings. The Court of Cassation came to the opinion that if a police officer withheld the driver’s license at the scene of the offense, and this was returned to the driver before the police authority’s decision on this withholding, it is not possible to reject the administrative action against the confirmation on withholding of the driver’s license as a measure of a public administration authority, because such a measure also interferes with the driver’s rights and is therefore subject to judicial review by the administrative court.

A police officer confiscated the driver’s license of a doctor who parked in a space reserved for people with disabilities without the driver holding a disabled parking permit. After 6 days, the driver’s license was returned to the driver, while at that time a decision on the confiscation of the driver’s license had not yet been issued. The driver filed an administrative action against the measure on the confiscation of the driver’s license, arguing that he had presented a license that, when providing health care, authorized him not to comply with the parking ban for the necessary time. The police officer did not address who, where and why the driver provided health care. Moreover, the driver considered the measure in question to be disproportionate. The administrative court dismissed the driver’s action as inadmissible, on the grounds that it considered the measure on the confiscation of the driver’s license to be a measure of a procedural nature that could not result in harm to his subjective rights.

The Court of Cassation, following the driver’s cassation complaint, stated that the basic prerequisite for the suspension of a driver’s license is a reasonable suspicion that the driver has committed an unlawful act for which a sanction of a ban on driving a motor vehicle may subsequently be imposed in misdemeanor (or even criminal) proceedings. This suspension may last until a final decision on the act is made and, in the opinion of the Court of Cassation, is undoubtedly and from the outset a serious interference with the driver’s legal status, because it temporarily prevents him from driving a motor vehicle and using it for ordinary needs related to personal, family or professional life.

The presumption of the legality of the detention of a driver’s license as a measure taken by a police officer at the scene of a detected offense is, in the opinion of the Court of Cassation, primarily the pursuit of the interest in maintaining safety and the smooth flow of road traffic and the reasonableness of the expectation that, given the qualification of the act and the circumstances of the case, the driver will be imposed a ban on activity in subsequent misdemeanor proceedings. The discretion on the reasonableness of the detention and the impending sanction for the detected offense belongs to the police officer. However, the authorization of a police officer to detain a driver’s license does not automatically mean an obligation to do so, nor does it mean that such a procedure is reasonable in each individual case, even if it is possible under the law.

Based on the applicable legislation and existing case law, the Court of Cassation stated that if a driver’s license has been withheld, about which the police officer issues a confirmation (measure) to the driver, the police authority is obliged to issue a decision on whether the withholding of the driving license was in accordance with the law no later than 15 days from the date of withholding the driving license. However, if the driver’s license is returned to the driver before such a decision is issued by the police authority, the driver may seek a review of the legality of the withholding of the driving license by means of an administrative action against the measure or action of the police authority, in particular whether the police officer’s action during the withholding was not a clear deviation from the limits set by law, and whether the police officer did not exceed his powers, e.g. did not purposefully “overqualify” the offense.

The Court of Cassation is of the opinion that every act (decision, measure or factual intervention) of a public administration body that affects the rights, legally protected interests or obligations of a natural or legal person must be reviewable by a court based on an administrative action. The Court of Cassation had no doubts that the detention of a driver’s license, even for a few days, can interfere with the legal status of a driver.

This resolution was adopted by the Supreme Administrative Court unanimously, and no appeal is admissible against it.

This was decided by Panel No. 2 of the Supreme Administrative Court, composed of: President of the Chamber JUDr. Marián Trenčan (judge rapporteur) and judges JUDr. Elena Berthotyová, PhD. and prof. JUDr. Juraj Vačok, PhD.