The agreement on the provision of legal assistance is not public – BCU
Bar Council of Ukraine in its decision No. 111 dated October 18, 2025, responded to questions regarding the possibility of concluding legal assistance agreements by accepting a public offer, using an electronic form of the agreement, and posting information about legal assistance on websites.
The relevant clarification was provided by the bar self-government body at the request of advocates.
BCU proceeded from the assumption that special regulation of the legal profession by law provides for the right and, in certain cases, the obligation of an advocate to refuse to accept a case. This excludes the possibility of imposing on an advocate the obligation to conclude a contract for the provision of legal assistance with everyone who applies. At the same time, Article 633 of the Civil Code defines the concept of a public contract, under which an entrepreneur undertakes to sell goods, perform work, or provide services to everyone who applies to him on equal terms.
At the same time, a distinction should be made between the concepts of «public contract» (Article 633 of the Civil Code), «adhesion contract» (Article 634 of the Civil Code) and «public offer» (general provisions on offer and acceptance). The mere fact of using a public offer or standard terms of contract does not mean that the contract is «public» within the meaning of Article 633 of the Civil Code, i.e., one under which the obligating party does not have the right to refuse to conclude a contract with any consumer. For a contract for the provision of legal assistance, it is the public contract regime that is problematic, rather than the use of an adhesion contract or public offer mechanism as a means of expressing the will of the parties.
Separately, the BCU drew attention to the fact that the Law «On preventing and combating the legalization (laundering) of proceeds obtained by criminal means, financing of terrorism and financing of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction» classifies advocates, advocate firms, and advocate associations as specially designated entities subject to primary financial monitoring.
It is impossible for an advocate to perform the duties of such an entity without establishing a relationship with the client, in particular without identifying and verifying the client, collecting and storing the information required by law. The form of the contract (written, electronic, etc.) does not in itself prevent the proper performance of financial monitoring duties, provided that the advocate ensures the identification and verification of the client, the collection of the necessary information, and the proper recording of documents, including the use of technical means of remote identification provided for by law.
In view of the above, the BCU has made the following conclusions:
1. A contract for the provision of legal assistance is not, by its legal nature, a public contract within the meaning of Article 633 of the Civil Code. Attributing the characteristics of a public contract to it, in particular establishing the obligation to conclude it with an indefinite circle of persons without the right of refusal in cases provided for by law, contradicts the special regulation of the legal profession.
2. Concluding a contract for the provision of legal assistance as a public contract by having the client accept the general terms and conditions set out in a public offer is not consistent with Article 633 of the Civil Code and does not meet the requirements of the Law «On the advocacy and the practice of law» and the Rules of professional conduct for advocates. The use of a public offer and an adhesion contract is possible only as a technical means of concluding an individual contract for the provision of legal assistance, subject to compliance with the specified requirements, individual identification of the client, and preservation of the advocate's right to refuse to conclude a contract in cases provided for by law.
3. An electronic form of a contract for the provision of legal assistance, including the use of information and telecommunications systems, is permissible subject to compliance with the requirements of the relevant law, the RPA, and financial monitoring legislation. The Law «On electronic commerce» does not change the legal nature of such a contract.
4. The form of the agreement (including by adhering to the standard terms and conditions posted on the website) does not exempt the advocate, law firm, or law office from performing the duties of a specially designated primary financial monitoring entity.
5. Posting information on websites about the provision of legal assistance regarding mobilization, conscription, crossing the state border, appealing decisions of the Military Registration and Enlistment Office, etc. is permitted subject to compliance with the requirements of the Law «On advertising» and Article 13 of the RPA, without using phrases such as «guaranteed result», «100% deferral», or other phrases that may be misleading or encourage unlawful behavior.
The full text of the BCU decision can be viewed at this link.
© 2025 Unba.org.ua Всі права захищені
"Національна Асоціація Адвокатів України". Передрук та інше використання матеріалів, що розміщені на даному веб-сайті дозволяється за умови посилання на джерело. Інтернет-видання та засоби масової інформації можуть використовувати матеріали сайту, розміщувати відео з офіційного веб-сайту Національної Асоціації Адвокатів України на власних веб-сторінках, за умови гіперпосилання на офіційний веб-сайт Національної Асоціації Адвокатів України. Заборонено передрук та використання матеріалів, у яких міститься посилання на інші інтернет-видання та засоби масової інформації. Матеріали позначені міткою "Реклама", публікуються на правах реклами.