Publication date: 22.05.2024
Powers of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine regarding the renewal or extension of procedural terms: analysis of the legal position of the courts
In the light of the latest legislative changes and judicial practice, the issue of discretionary powers of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (Ministry of Justice) in terms of renewal or extension of procedural terms is gaining more and more importance. For the correct interpretation of these powers, it is necessary to refer to judicial practice and analysis of legislation.
Discretionary powers: definition and legal context
At the legislative level, the definition of the concept of discretionary powers of the subject of power has not been established, however, judicial practice contains a clear understanding of this concept. According to the practice of the cassation instance, discretionary powers mean the ability of an administrative body to independently (at its own discretion) choose one of several possible decision options within the limits defined by law. At the same time, the powers of administrative bodies are not discretionary when there is only one legitimate and legally justified option of behavior.
Judicial practice regarding renewal of procedural terms
Based on the analysis of the decisions of the Supreme Court, it can be concluded that the term established by Article 34 of the Law of Ukraine "On State Registration of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Organizations" is limited and cannot be extended or renewed by the Ministry of Justice under any circumstances.In the decision of July 25, 2023 in case No. 910/6143/23, the Supreme Court emphasized that in case of violation of the one-year period for appealing the registrar's decision, actions or inaction, the Ministry of Justice does not have discretionary powers to renew this period. That is, if the complaint is submitted in violation of the established deadline, the Ministry of Justice automatically refuses to satisfy it.
Legal restrictions and their consequences
The Law of Ukraine "On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Improvement of the Anti-Raiding Mechanism" determined that the Ministry of Justice is deprived of discretionary powers to resolve the issue of the validity of the reasons for the omission and renewal of the time limits for appealing the decision, action or inaction of registrars. This issue is regulated by legislation and does not provide for alternatives.
Therefore, the omission of the one-year period leads to the automatic rejection of the complaint, and its non-consideration on the merits. This means that the Ministry of Justice, having established a time limit violation, definitely refuses to satisfy the complaint without considering its merits.You may be interested in the following articles: Analysis, consultation, evaluation. legal analysis of the situation, lawyer's consultation, lawyer's consultation, analysis of documents, legal analysis of the situation, written consultation, verification of documents by a lawyer, lawyers' documents, lawyer's help online, lawyer online, legal opinion, legal opinion of a lawyer, lawyer online.
Alternative ways of appeal
It is worth noting that the mentioned Law does not contain deadlines for filing a lawsuit with the court to declare it illegal and cancel the registrar's decision, actions or inaction. This gives individuals the opportunity to challenge such decisions in court, even if they missed the one-year deadline. For this, it is necessary to prepare appropriate and admissible evidence that confirms the moment when the person learned about the violation of his rights, and justify the impossibility of learning about it earlier.For example, for a certain period of time in 2022, access to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Organizations, as well as to other state registers, was limited. This can be a strong argument in court regarding the impossibility of filing a complaint in a timely manner.
Conclusions
Summing up, we can conclude that the one-year period established by Part 3 of Article 34 of the Law of Ukraine "On State Registration of Legal Entities, Individuals - Entrepreneurs and Public Organizations" for appealing the registrar's decision, actions or inaction in the Ministry of Justice cannot be renewed. The Ministry of Justice of Ukraine does not have the right to decide on the validity of the reasons for missing this deadline, as this is regulated by legislation and does not provide for alternatives.
However, persons who missed the set deadline have the right to apply to the court for recognition as illegal and annulment of the registrar's decision, actions or inaction. In this case, it is important to prepare appropriate evidence confirming the moment of learning about the violation and the impossibility of detecting it earlier.
This approach makes it possible to ensure the protection of the rights of citizens and business entities, while observing the principle of legal certainty and stability, which is the basis of the effective functioning of the legal system of Ukraine.
