The SC Grand Chamber Has Resolved a Jurisdictional Issue Regarding the Appeal of Decisions, Actions or Inaction of the Official of the State Executive Service

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court ruled on the jurisdiction of cases in the complaint against the order of the Head of the Department of the State Executive Service (SES), following the consideration of the complaint against the order of a state executor.

In case No. 175/1571/15 there was a legal problem of appealing the order of the Head of a SES Department, adopted during the consideration of the complaint against the order of a state executor on forwarding executive proceedings to another SES department. In particular, the question arose as to whether the actions of a person in authority were aimed at performing the functions of control over the activities of subordinates or constituted a decision taken as a state executor to execute a judgment.

The case was initiated by a person who appealed against the order of the Head of the SES Department. The court of first instance satisfied the appeal. The court of appeal overturned the ruling of the court of first instance and closed the proceedings on the grounds that the case was subject to be heard in an administrative court. The Civil Cassation Court within the Supreme Court referred the case to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.

According to part 1, Art. 74 of the Law of Ukraine "On Executive Proceedings", decisions, actions or inaction of the executor and officials of the SES bodies on the execution of a judgement can be appealed by the parties, other participants and persons to the court that issued the executive document, in the manner prescribed by law.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court pointed to the fact that the Law changed the jurisdiction generally defined by procedural codes for complaints against decisions, actions and inaction of the executor and officials of the SES bodies for the execution of a judgement. Such a change of jurisdiction is related to the implementation by the courts of their functions to control the execution of their judgments in the manner prescribed by procedural codes.

The transfer of executive proceedings from one SES body to another is an integral part of the execution of the judgement.

Such a decision affects the rights and obligations of the parties to the executive proceedings, and therefore these actions or decisions of the state executor or the official of the SES are subject to control by the court that issued the executive document. At the same time, the exercise of control functions by an SES official does not affect the jurisdiction of the dispute. This approach ensures that control over the execution of a judgment is concentrated in one judicial body.

In view of the foregoing, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court concluded that complaints against decisions, actions and/or inaction of an official of the SES Department, committed in order to control the decisions, actions or inaction of a state executor to execute a judgment, were subject to the jurisdiction of the court that had issued the judgement.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the judgment of the court of appeal and referred the case to the court of appeal for further consideration.

Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in case No. 175/1571/15 (proceedings No. 14-51цс21) – https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/101829975.

This and other legal positions of the Supreme Court can be found in the Database of Legal Positions of the Supreme Court - lpd.court.gov.ua/login.