The binding nature of court judgments is a constitutional cornerstone of Ukrainian justice — and a core component of the right to a fair trial. To ensure this principle works beyond the paperwork, the Code of Administrative Proceedings (CAP of Ukraine) introduced a judicial oversight tool: obliging public authorities to file a compliance report on the enforcement of court decisions.
On June 27, 2025, the NGO “Pro Justice” gathered a solid lineup of stakeholders — from judges to advocates and private bailiffs — to unpack how judicial control functions in real life.
The opening remarks were delivered by Iryna Zharonkina, Head of the “Enforcement of Judgments and Protection of Property Rights” component of the EU Project Pravo-Justice, whose team has been driving the import of best EU practices into Ukraine’s enforcement system.
During the first session, Dr. Olena Hubska, Justice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, shared insights into the upward trend in rulings applying judicial oversight in Supreme Court practice. She also touched upon ECtHR case law, noting that a considerable chunk of Ukrainian applications stem from non-execution of domestic judgments.
“Enforcement of court judgments is a precondition for Ukraine’s accession to the European community,” — Justice Hubska stressed.
She pointed to systemic hurdles both for courts and administrative bodies — with underfunding topping the list. Judge Tetiana Kravchenko from the Donetsk District Administrative Court seconded the concern:
“There were cases when only five thousand hryvnias were paid out over a year against a half-million debt.”
Daria Tarasenko, attorney-at-law, spoke from the trenches about how Supreme Court precedents are used in practice:
“Before filing a claim, a lawyer should already think about how that decision will be enforced.”
She shared client stories, showcased her personal digest of CAP case law, and flagged a few legislative gaps around judicial oversight mechanisms.
The second session focused on how the compliance report model is being rolled out in commercial and civil proceedings. Judge Olena Fonova, of the Luhansk Commercial Court, co-founder and deputy chair of Pro Justice, moderated the discussion, opening with data and field notes on reporting patterns.
Among the speakers were Judge Maksym Khodakivskyi (Zhovtnevyi District Court of Dnipro, trainer at the National School of Judges, GEMME Ukraine member) and Oksana Rusetska, Head of the Association of Private Bailiffs. Both agreed that the new mechanism has already kicked into gear.
Khodakivskyi noted that in family disputes, judicial oversight sometimes becomes the claimant’s last bullet for fairness. Rusetska added:
“In enforcement proceedings, the court’s role is huge — especially with non-monetary judgments. The execution rate is still low, but before 2024, we had almost zero leverage.”
Toward the end, the room heated up: while judges and lawyers mainly shared positive feedback, Olena Merson, Head of the Legal Department of the Pension Fund in Kharkiv region, laid out the tough reality — the chronic lack of budget:
“In 2025, not a single payment under court decisions has been made. Without legislative tweaks, the system is simply deadlocked.”
The participants concluded that, despite its imperfections, the compliance report has proven to be a real tool for restoring justice — not just a procedural formality.
📌 The event was organized under the EU Project “Pravo-Justice”, implemented by Expertise France and funded by the European Union.
