CEDAW/C/73/D/102/2016 effectiveness of this remedy in sterilization cases and was well suited for the finding of violations of women’s personal rights and the award of financial compensation. In the context of the civil proceedings, the authors were entitled to submit their arguments with the assistance of a lawyer, indicate evidence that they considered relevant and appropriate, have an adversarial hearing on the merits of their case and seek compensation. The authors had the opportunity to have the actions of the hospital staff that they considered unlawful examined by the domestic courts and, if successful, to receive appropriate redress. 4.19 The State party refutes the allegations that F., M., C. and J.D. did not have access to legal advice and emphasizes that since 2001, there have been two avenues for the authors to obtain legal aid. Pursuant to article 30 of the Civil Procedure Code, a presiding judge shall appoint a legal representative upon the request of a participant who fulfils the preconditions to be exempted from court fees if it is necessary for the protection of the interests of the participant. According to article 18 (2) of Act No. 85/1996 on the Legal Profession, a person who cannot receive legal services under this Act shall have the right to have their lawyer appointed by the Bar upon the person’s application.35 The Bar Association organizes free legal advice services in regions of the State party. 4.20 The claim by the authors that the limitation period prevented them from filing a civil action is incorrect. Until 2008, such remedy was free of any limitation periods. The State party is aware of inconsistencies in the case law of lower courts. However, the chances of the authors obtaining compensation were reasonably high because the Supreme Court, which is a general court of last instance, repeatedly adjudi cated that such claims would not be time-barred. 36 4.21 During the seven-year period from the entry into force of the Optional Protocol until 2008, there was no applicable limitation period for civil action for the protection of personal rights, including in respect of claims for non-pecuniary damage. The State party affirms that the authors should have exhausted civil action within a reasonable time from the moment they discovered “the real significance and all consequences” of their sterilizations. 4.22 The effectiveness of the remedy remained preserved after 2008 despite the new approach of the Supreme Court whereby claims for financial compensation were subject to the general limitation period. The law allows claimants to overcome a potential disproportionate hardship of the limitation period through the imperative that rights must be exercised in accordance with good morals. This applies when the aggrieved party does not let the limitation period expire through its own fault and in relation to whom the extinction of the claim would be a disproportionately harsh penalty. 37 Courts are obliged to assess the objection of limitation against its possible conflict with good morals, to find a fair solution and to consider whether the limitation period constitutes a disproportionately harsh penalty, when serious and permanent injuries to health are involved. 38 4.23 The State party provides examples of cases in which the filing of a civil action led to the satisfaction of the claim for compensation for unlawful sterilization, __________________ 35 36 37 38 19-15443 The Bar may identify conditions for the provision of legal services, including the duty to provide services free of charge or for a reduced fee if the property and income situation of the applicant suggest so. Czech Republic, Supreme Court, Opinion File No. Prz 33/67, 1967; Case No. 30 Cdo 1542/2003, judgment of 25 September 2003; Case No. 30 Cdo 1522/2007, judgment of 28 June 2007. Czech Republic, Constitutional Court, Case File No. I, ÚS 643/04, judgment of 6 September 2005. Czech Republic, Constitutional Court, Case File No. II, ÚS 635/09, judgment of 31 August 2010. 11/18