Schematy Ponziego – wnioski z czeskiego orzecznictwa
Abstract
The article examines Ponzi schemes and pyramid games within the context of Czech criminal law, offering both a theoretical overview and an analysis of selected court cases. The aim of this article is to distinguish between these fraudulent structures. In addition to outlining theoretical differences in certain elements, the paper also seeks to analyse the possible criminal law consequences of such conduct, including the appropriate legal qualification.
Finally, to demonstrate the connection with the decision-making practice of Czech courts, three notable rulings are analysed in detail. The article highlights both the similarities and differences between Ponzi schemes and pyramid games, particularly their common reliance on the recruitment of new participants to sustain payouts and the eventual inevitability of collapse. It examines the legal qualification of such conduct, which is typically considered fraud, although pyramid schemes may alternatively fall under the offence of the practice of unfair games and wagers. Czech court rulings repeatedly emphasise recurring patterns of deceptive behaviour, financial losses, and challenges in proving intent. Ultimately, the study underlines the continued relevance of such schemes and the need for robust legal mechanisms to protect victims and safeguard market integrity.
Keywords:
criminal law, Ponzi scheme, pyramid game, case law, fraudReferences
Boyle P., Peng Z., Ponzi schemes: a review, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5019934 Google Scholar
Cohler A., The evolution and impacts of the Ponzi scheme and governmental oversight: an honor’s senior thesis project on the intricacies of Ponzi schemes and its regulating authority, https://www.ramapo.edu/honors/wp-content/uploads/sites/55/2019/08/Cohler-ASB-2017.pdf Google Scholar
Dostálová E., Ščerba F., Opatrnost poškozeného coby zvláštní znak podvodu, „Trestněprávní revue” 2024, No. 4. Google Scholar
Jacobs P., Schain L., The never ending attraction of the Ponzi scheme, „Journal of Comprehensive Research” 2011, No. 9. Google Scholar
Jory R.S., Perry M., Ponzi schemes: a critical analysis, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1894206 Google Scholar
Lewis M.K., New dogs, old tricks: why Ponzi schemes succeed?, „Accounting Forum” 2012, No. 4, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271584696_New_dogs_old_tricks_Why_do_Ponzi_schemes_succeed Google Scholar
Lewis M.K., Understanding Ponzi schemes. Can better financial regulation prevent investors from being defrauded?, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham 2018. Google Scholar
Molnárová G., Možnosti postihu Ponzi schémat a klasických pyramidových her, https://www.epravo.cz/top/clanky/moznosti-postihu-ponzi-schemat-a-klasickych-pyramidovych-her-17866.html Google Scholar
Šámal P. et al., Trestní zákoník II. Zvláštní část. Komentář § 140–271, C.H. Beck, Praha 2023. Google Scholar
Ščerba F. et al., Trestní zákoník. Komentář § 205–421, C.H. Beck, Praha 2020. Google Scholar
Švásta P., Pyramidové programy a Ponziho schémata v českém právu, https://www.epravo.cz/top/clanky/pyramidove-programy-a-ponziho-schemata-v-ceskem-pravu-86517.html Google Scholar
Tajti T., Pyramid and Ponzi schemes and the repercussions of the differing regulatory approaches. Hungarian developments in the light of contemporary global trends, „Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies” 2021, No. 1, https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2052/62/1/article-p24.xml Google Scholar
Wilkins A.M., Acuff W.W., Hermanson D.R., Understanding a Ponzi scheme: victims’ perspectives, „Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting” 2012, No. 1, http://web.nacva.com/JFIA/Issues/JFIA-2012-1_1.pdf Google Scholar
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
