Resolution 821 Returns: The Cabinet Tries to Restore "Manual Control" Over Pension Payments Through the Supreme Court

The situation regarding the enforcement of court decisions in pension cases in Ukraine has long been problematic. For years, the government attempted to legalise payment delays by introducing subordinate acts that made the enforcement of court decisions contingent on the availability of budget funds. The primary instrument of this policy was Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 821, dated 14 July 2015, which permitted the proportional settlement of arrears based on budget allocations, effectively allowing payments in instalments over an indefinite period.

However, as reported by the "Judicial-Legal Newspaper" in 2016, the judicial system sided with citizens. Decisions by the Kyiv District Administrative Court and the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal declared Resolution No. 821 unlawful and invalid.

Despite this, the Cabinet of Ministers decided to continue its "fight against pensioners" by filing a cassation appeal against the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal's decision, which had invalidated Resolution No. 821 for establishing a mechanism for proportional payment of pension arrears based on court decisions. Concurrently, the government is requesting the Supreme Court to suspend the effect of these court decisions until the cassation review is complete.

Should this request be granted, the enforcement of the decision that paves the way for paying multi-billion arrears to pensioners may be temporarily halted. This primarily affects military pensioners, victims of the Chernobyl disaster, and other individuals who have secured pension recalculations through the courts. According to the Pension Fund, the total amount of unenforced court decisions in this category of cases stands at approximately UAH 96.7 billion.

This procedural mechanism, provided for by the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, aims to temporarily suspend the enforcement of court decisions until the final ruling of the cassation instance.

If the Supreme Court grants this request, the effect of Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 821 will effectively be reinstated during the cassation appeal review. This would mean that the Pension Fund of Ukraine would continue to apply a special procedure for enforcing court decisions on pension payments, which prioritises financing within available budget allocations rather than through general compulsory enforcement. Consequently, the Pension Fund would once again temporarily have the right to disregard court decisions, citing this special procedure. The actual repayment of arrears under court decisions could therefore be postponed until the cassation proceedings are finalised.

During the cassation review, the issue of enforcing court decisions on pension payments will remain unresolved. Following the annulment of Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 821, the Pension Fund of Ukraine had already highlighted the absence of a special financing mechanism for such payments and emphasised the need for legislative regulation of the relevant procedure.

In justifying payment delays, the Pension Fund of Ukraine and the Ministry of Social Policy cite martial law conditions, limited budget resources, and the necessity to prioritise funding for the security and defence sector. According to state authorities, the issue is not a refusal to enforce court decisions but rather the determination of the order and priority of their financing under constrained budget capabilities.

The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal has stressed that the right to social protection must be real and effective, and the enforcement of a court decision cannot be reduced to merely formally calculating amounts without their actual payment.

How Pensioners Can Protect Their Rights

Despite a cassation review of a case, court decisions that have entered into legal force are subject to enforcement unless their effect is suspended by the Supreme Court. Therefore, individuals in whose favour pension recalculation decisions have been made can use the procedural mechanisms provided by law to protect their rights.

In particular, such mechanisms include:

• Changing the method and procedure of enforcing a court decision in accordance with Article 378 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, if necessary to ensure its actual enforcement.

• Filing a petition to establish judicial control over the enforcement of the decision, which allows the court to require a report on its enforcement from the authority and respond to cases of unjustified delay.

• Obtaining an enforcement order and initiating enforcement proceedings with the state enforcement service or a private executor (in cases provided by law), which is the general mechanism for compulsory enforcement of court decisions.

Judicial practice shows that recalculating a pension without the actual payment of due amounts does not mean full enforcement of the court decision if its operative part provides for full restoration of the person's violated right.

The Cabinet of Ministers' attempt to appeal the cancellation of Resolution No. 821 is an effort to preserve a budget-friendly but illegal system of "manual" fund allocation. If the Supreme Court suspends the effect of the appellate decisions, pensioners will again find themselves in a legal dead end for an indefinite period.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua, follow SUD.UA on Google News , and join us on VIBER, WhatsApp, Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the important events.