Payment of court fees for a non-property claim: what should be changed
An attempt to simplify the rules for paying court fees may lead to a situation of legal uncertainty when there is no regulatory rule in case of filing a lawsuit with several non-property claims.
This was warned by the Committee of the Ukrainian National Bar Association on Civil Law and Procedure following the analysis of the draft Law No. 11368 of 24.06.2024 «On Amendments to Article 6 of the Law of Ukraine «On Court Fee» regarding the payment of court fees for non-property claims».
As of today, pursuant to Part 3 of the said Article, the court fee for filing a claim that is both property and non-property in nature is paid at the rates established for property and non-property claims.
However, if the statement of claim combines two or more non-property claims, the court fee shall be paid for each non-property claim.
And the implementation of this rule leads to confusion in determining the amount of court fees. For example, in cases of eviction of several persons from residential premises, in some cases, the court proceeded from the fact that the court fee is payable as a single non-property claim, and in others - that the eviction of each person specified in the statement of claim is an independent non-property claim, and therefore the court fee must be paid separately for each of such claims (see the resolution of the Joint Chamber of the CCC of the Supreme Court of 18.09.2023 in case No. 758/5118/21).
Therefore, in cases where the plaintiff combines non-property claims against several defendants in one claim, the author of the legislative initiative proposes to replace two paragraphs of Part 3 of Article 6 of the Law with one paragraph as follows:
«For filing a claim that has both property and non-property nature, the court fee shall be paid at the rates established for claims of property and non-property nature (regardless of the number of non-property claims)».
But the UNBA drew attention to the construction of the provisions of Part 3 of Article 6 of the Law. Its first paragraph concerns the combination of property and non-property claims in one statement of claim, while the second paragraph concerns several non-property claims.
Therefore, if the law is implemented in the wording proposed by Draft Law No. 11368, there will be no regulation at all for cases where only non-property claims are combined in a statement of claim.
That is why, in the opinion of the UNBA Committee, it is more appropriate to leave the first paragraph in the current version, and to amend the second one as follows: «If the statement of claim combines two or more non-property claims, the court fee shall be paid in the amount of one non-property claim». In this case, the principle of legal certainty will be respected, as well as the possibilities for protecting civil rights and interests of a person will be expanded.
The full text of the comments and suggestions can be found at the link.
Popular news
Interaction
Protecting the rights of service members: The UNBA and the Military Ombudsman have agreed on cooperation
Servicemembers, reservists, conscripts during training exercises, members of local community volunteer units, and other individuals covered by the Law «On the Military Ombudsman» should have better access to professional legal assistance.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Reform without data and advocacy: what the Ministry of Justice’s launch has revealed
The Ministry of Justice hosted the first meeting of the working group on bar reform. But instead of professional preparation of legislative changes, we saw exactly what Armada Network Director Dale Armstrong had spoken about the day before in Kyiv: not reform, but a struggle for control over the agenda through a narrow circle of “stakeholders” who create an echo chamber of influence for themselves.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Advocacy, European integration and the limits of intervention: an American report presented in Kyiv
Following its presentation in Brussels, the report «The Ukrainian advocacy in the context of the rule of law and European integration» made its way to Kyiv. It highlighted critical issues both in understanding the very nature of the self-governing profession and in the emergence of a «shadow market» surrounding the Ukrainian advocacy.
Discussion
ETAIDF and MMC: where the system fails
The new system for assessing a person’s daily functioning and the practice of undergoing medical-legal examinations have already raised numerous questions — ranging from unclear procedures to difficulties in appealing decisions. These issues were examined by advocates during the roundtable discussion «Problematic issues of the ETAIDF and MMC», organized by the UNBA Committee on the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities and the All-Ukrainian public organization «Human rights union of persons with disabilities».
Rule of Law Roadmap
Access to the advocate profession: a subgroup has identified the direction of change
On Monday, March 16, a meeting was held of the subgroup «Access to the profession and training of advocates. Organizational forms of legal practice» of the Working Group on the implementation of the Rule of Law Roadmap.
Rule of Law Roadmap
Organization of advocacy: subgroup agrees on approaches to regulatory reform
On March 13, a meeting was held of the «Organization of the advocacy and self-government» subgroup of the Working Group on the implementation of the Rule of Law Roadmap regarding bar reform. The event was conducted via videoconference.
Abroad
Where does legal information end and legal assistance begin?
Law firms find themselves in a dilemma: they want to make the most of artificial intelligence, but at the same time, more and more people are entrusting their legal matters to large language models. And this, as experts point out, entails countless risks.
Guarantees of the practice of law
During a search of an advocate's office in Kyiv a telephone was seized and personal records were examined
Detectives from the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine conducted a search of the office of a Kyiv law firm as part of criminal proceedings under Part 1 of Article 366-2 (False Declaration) and Article 368-5 (Illegal Enrichment) of the Criminal Code.
Publications
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition during wartime: when the risks outweigh the request
Volodymyr Matsko Extradition as a systemic form of rights violations
Victoria Yakusha, Law and Business The anti-corruption vertical cannot «take care» of the Bar as an institution, - acting head of the HQDCB
Censor.net Protecting advocates – protecting justice: addressing concerns about the new law
Ihor Kolesnykov A BRIEF SUMMARY REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF THE ORDER ON EXTENDED CONFISCATION IN LATVIA REGARDING FINANCIAL ASSETS OF…
Valentyn Gvozdiy WORKING IN A WAR ZONE
Lydia Izovitova Formula of perfection
Sergiy Vylkov Our judicial system is so built that courts do not trust advocates
