Publication date: 15.05.2025
Hi, I am Dmitry, and I am the founder of the law office “Dmitry Mamchik”. I am a practicing lawyer, member of the National Bar Association of Ukraine, psychologist, successful business owner, athlete. I have experience and skills that will help you solve your problem efficiently and in a short time. I will be happy to help!
DECISION IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE — Case No. 758/12971/15-ts
On September 18, 2024, the Supreme Court reviewed the cassation appeal in the case of OSOBA_1 vs. the Social Insurance Fund of Ukraine regarding unlawful dismissal.
Summary of the Claim
In November 2015, OSOBA_1 filed a lawsuit against the executive directorate of the Social Insurance Fund, whose legal successor is the Social Insurance Fund of Ukraine. The lawsuit concerned the annulment of the dismissal order dated October 26, 2015, No. 364-k, reinstatement to the position, recovery of lost wages due to forced absence, and compensation for moral damages.
The plaintiff claimed the dismissal was unlawful because the order was signed by an unauthorized person, and he did not belong to the category of officials who could be dismissed under point 5, part 1, Article 41 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.
Summary of Court Decisions
The Podilsky District Court of Kyiv on February 1, 2023, and the Kyiv Court of Appeal on June 20, 2023, denied the claim. The court stated that the dismissal order was signed by an authorized person and found no violations.
Cassation Appeal
In August 2023, OSOBA_1 filed a cassation appeal, citing violations of substantive and procedural law, including the disregard of Supreme Court precedents in similar cases. He argued that the dismissal order was signed by an acting director who lacked authority, and his position did not include administrative functions.
Position of the Supreme Court
- Factual Circumstances: OSOBA_1 worked at the Fund since 2014. The dismissal order was signed by an acting director while the main director was on leave. Moreover, the Fund itself is not a business entity, meaning point 5, part 1, Article 41 of the Labor Code cannot be applied.
- Legal Analysis: The Supreme Court referred to the Constitution of Ukraine and labor legislation, emphasizing that the dismissal was unlawful. The court also pointed out the acting director’s lack of authority and procedural violations by the lower courts.
Case Outcome
- The decisions of the first and appellate instances regarding reinstatement were overturned;
- OSOBA_1 was reinstated to his position as of October 27, 2015;
- The compensation claim was returned to the appellate court for reconsideration;
Conclusion: The Supreme Court protected the employee's labor rights, declaring the dismissal unlawful and the order inconsistent with current legislation.
DECISION IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE — Case No. 758/12971/15-ts
On September 18, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in the cassation case of OSOBA_1 against the Social Insurance Fund of Ukraine regarding unlawful dismissal.
Supreme Court Decision
ORDERED:
- Partially grant the cassation appeal of OSOBA_1.
- Cancel the decision of the Podilskyi District Court of Kyiv dated February 1, 2023, and the ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal dated June 20, 2023, regarding the reinstatement claim, and adopt a new decision.
- Grant OSOBA_1’s claim against the Social Insurance Fund of Ukraine for reinstatement.
- Reinstate OSOBA_1 to the position of Deputy Head of the Department - Head of the Engineering and Technical Support Division of the Administrative Support Directorate of the Social Insurance Fund of Ukraine, effective October 27, 2015.
- Cancel the ruling of the Kyiv Court of Appeal dated June 20, 2023, regarding the claim for lost wages due to forced absence and compensation for moral damages. Send this part of the case for a new review to the appellate court.
- The decision of the cassation court enters into legal force upon its issuance, is final, and is not subject to appeal.
Judicial Panel
- Presiding Judge: M. Ye. Chervinska
- Judges: A. Yu. Zaitsev, Ye. V. Korotenko, V. M. Korotun, M. Yu. Titov
The Supreme Court upheld justice in labor law matters, ruling OSOBA_1’s dismissal unlawful and restoring him to his position.
This case illustrates the importance of complying with labor law norms, even when formal grounds for dismissal exist. Legal grounds must be confirmed not only by content but also by procedural form and an authorized entity.
Judicial oversight of labor rights compliance is an effective mechanism against abuses. In case of doubts about the legality of dismissal orders, legal assistance should be sought.
