The Supreme Court drew attention to the peculiarity of submitting a warrant through the «Electronic Court»

If the order for legal aid is attached to a document certified by an attorney's electronic signature, no additional handwritten («physical») or electronic signature is required to be affixed to the order.

This conclusion was made by the Civil Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court in case No. 483/346/24. The decision of 06.11.2024 was reported by the Judicial Power portal.

In this case, the Court of Appeal returned the appeal filed by a lawyer through an electronic cabinet in the UJICS, since the copy of the order to provide the plaintiff with legal aid did not contain the lawyer's signature attached to the appeal. Attachment of a scanned copy of the order not signed by the lawyer to the appeal filed through the Electronic Court system does not indicate compliance with the form of the document confirming the lawyer's right to represent the interests of the person.

The CCC of the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the court of appeal, transferred the case to the court of appeal to decide on the issue of opening the appeal proceedings, making the following legal conclusions.

Thus, the decision of the Bar Council of Ukraine dated June 8, 2024 No. 36 «On Amendments to the Regulations on the Order for Legal Aid and to the UNBA Decision No. 162 dated August 4, 2017», in particular, supplemented clause 12 of the Regulations with a new subparagraph 12.15 as follows: «12.15. The order is considered to be signed by an attorney (head of a law firm / law office) if the column «Advocate» contains either a handwritten (physical) signature; or the order is certified by an electronic signature; or the document to which the order is an attachment is certified by an electronic signature».

The Court of Cassation noted that guaranteeing everyone the right to judicial protection and prohibiting restrictions on such a right, including in the context of intense digitalization of society, full-scale armed aggression against Ukraine by the Russian Federation and the introduction of martial law throughout Ukraine, at least in terms of the highest social value of human life and health, encourage assistance in ensuring pluralism of ways of interaction between courts and litigants, ways of signing the warrant, rather than their restriction by courts.

The warrant must be signed by a lawyer. The order is considered to contain the signature of an attorney, provided that: it contains a handwritten («physical») signature, is signed with an electronic signature and is an attachment to a document signed with an electronic signature.

If the warrant is attached to a document certified by an electronic signature, no additional handwritten («physical») or electronic signature is required to be affixed to the warrant.

The Court of Appeal found that the appeal was filed through the Electronic Court system and was signed with an electronic signature.

Provided that the appeal is signed with an electronic signature, to which a copy of the order is attached, the conclusion of the appellate court that the copy of the order is considered unsigned is erroneous.