See more
Publication date: 24.05.2024
Restoration of Time Limits for Appeal: Supreme Court's Conclusions on the Application of Procedural Law Norms
Introduction
The issue of restoring the time limit for appeals is one of the key topics in the field of civil procedural law. The timely filing of an appeal is crucial for the protection of the parties' rights and interests in judicial proceedings. The Supreme Court of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the SC) has repeatedly provided clarifications on the application of procedural law norms in this area. The aim of this article is to analyze the latest conclusions of the SC regarding the restoration of the time limit for appeals.
Normative Legal Framework
According to Article 354 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the CPC), an appeal may be filed within thirty days from the date of the announcement of the decision of the court of first instance. In the event of missing this deadline for valid reasons, the appellate court may restore the time limit for filing an appeal.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.
Concept and Criteria of Valid Reasons for Missing the Deadline
In its rulings, the SC has repeatedly emphasized that valid reasons for missing the deadline can be circumstances that objectively made it impossible or significantly complicated the timely filing of an appeal. Such circumstances may include, for example, serious illness, long-term business trips, late receipt of the court decision, etc.
SC Ruling of December 15, 2021, in Case No. 761/36451/20
In this ruling, the SC provided clarifications on the assessment of the validity of the reasons for missing the deadline. The Court noted that the validity of the reasons for missing the deadline should be assessed taking into account all the circumstances of the specific case. The SC also emphasized that the applicant must provide appropriate evidence to support their claims.
SC Ruling of March 10, 2022, in Case No. 200/2345/21
The SC emphasized that the existence of valid reasons must be proven by the applicant. The Court also noted that the lack of proper evidence may be grounds for refusing to restore the time limit. In this case, the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence regarding the impossibility of timely filing of the appeal, as a result of which the court refused to restore the time limit.
Procedural Aspects of Restoring the Time Limit
SC Ruling of May 25, 2022, in Case No. 753/1284/21
In this ruling, the SC drew attention to the fact that the issue of restoring the time limit for appeal is decided simultaneously with the consideration of the appeal on the merits. The Court also emphasized that a violation of the procedure for submitting a request to restore the time limit may be grounds for refusing to satisfy it.
SC Ruling of September 14, 2022, in Case No. 524/6589/21
The SC noted that the appellate court must carefully verify the validity of the reasons for missing the deadline, but at the same time should not abuse its right to refuse to restore the time limit without sufficient grounds. The Court emphasized the need for a balance between the principle of legal certainty and the principle of access to justice.
Conclusions
The Supreme Court of Ukraine provides important clarifications on the application of procedural law norms in matters of restoring the time limit for appeal. The Court emphasizes the need to provide proper evidence of the validity of the reasons for missing the deadline, as well as the careful adherence to procedural requirements. The balance between legal certainty and access to justice is a key principle that should be considered when addressing such issues. These conclusions contribute to enhancing the efficiency and fairness of the judicial process, ensuring the proper protection of citizens' rights.
