A judge received a warning because of an advocate

A judge from Kryvyi Rih drew attention to himself when he decided to participate in a competition for an appellate court position. The High Qualification Commission of Judges suspended the evaluation process and referred the matter to the High Council of Justice due to the judge’s ties with an advocate, which were seen as indicating a violation of recusal rules.

In opening the disciplinary case, the chamber saw signs of a violation of recusal rules in two civil cases and one criminal proceeding. In the civil cases, the judge’s brother-in-law represented the parties, and in the criminal proceeding, he served as the defendant’s defense attorney. In two other criminal proceedings involving this advocate, prosecutors filed recusal motions against the judge on the same grounds. Other judges granted these motions.

The judge explained that he had informed the parties of the family relationship and sought their position on the matter. However, since no recusal motions were filed, he continued hearing the cases. The judge also noted that the advocate had joined the civil cases only after proceedings had already begun.

The High Qualification Commission of Judges drew attention to paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 36 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is mandatory in nature and establishes an unconditional ground for a judge’s recusal (self-recusal). This provision does not make its application contingent on the presence or absence of doubts regarding the judge’s impartiality or objectivity, but rather precludes the judge’s participation in the case where certain family ties exist. Thus, a judge is obligated to recuse himself or herself regardless of his or her own assessment of impartiality or the parties’ perception thereof, and failure to fulfill this obligation may in itself constitute a violation of the procedural law’s requirements regarding the composition of the court.

The disciplinary proceedings also concerned the completion of integrity declarations for the years 2022–2024, in which the judge confirmed the absence of any instances of potential or actual conflicts of interest.

«As a representative or defense advocate, an advocate exercises the client’s procedural rights. A family relationship with a judge does not automatically constitute a conflict of interest for the advocate. A conflict arises when the advocate’s personal interest conflicts with his or her duties to the client. The duty to recuse oneself is imposed on the judge by procedural law, - commented Diana Nazarenko, a member of the UNBA Committee on attorney ethics. - At the same time, the Rules of Professional Conduct require the advocate to comply with procedural law, not to ignore violations of the law by the court, and to respond in the manner prescribed by law. “In a civil case, an advocate should inform the client of the family relationship with the judge and the related procedural risks, file a reasoned motion for the judge’s recusal on behalf of the client, and formally document the relevant circumstance».

© 2026 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.