This paper examines the latest case law and urban studies covering place-naming conflicts (e.g. names of public streets, parks, metro stations, etc.). The author elucidates the relationship between the place naming rights in the context of Henry Lefebvre’s “right to the city” and critically assesses the existing approach of the authorities that consists in ignoring residents’ opinions. The author points out typical problems faced by the plaintiffs (preclusive time limits, the question of actio popularis) and hopes that in the place-naming disputes complaints relating to the right to the city will soon be given a green light when evaluating formal aspects of the claim. Today, all toponymic policies are concentrated in the hands of the city administration, and the task of citizens is to become at least an equal partner in this process.