Failure to submit the original document confirming payment of the court fee is not a ground for returning the appeal — Supreme Court

Failure to submit the original document confirming payment of the court fee is not an unconditional ground for returning the appeal, since the obligation to verify the fact of crediting the court fee to the special fund of the State Budget of Ukraine lies with the court. This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court.

On May 20, 2026, the Cassation Civil Court of the Supreme Court considered, under simplified proceedings, the cassation appeal of a LLC in the case filed by LLC against Person_1 for recovery of inflation losses and three percent annual interest.

The court of first instance refused to satisfy the claim by a default judgment. Disagreeing with this court decision, the LLC filed an appeal.

The appellate court left the appeal without movement on the grounds of failure to provide a document confirming payment of the court fee.

By the ruling of the same court, the appeal was recognized as not submitted and returned to the applicant, motivating this by non-compliance with the ruling on leaving the appeal without movement.

The Supreme Court disagreed with the conclusions of the appellate court, canceled the ruling, referred the case to the appellate court for continuation of consideration from the stage of deciding on opening appellate proceedings, and emphasized that ensuring the right to appeal must be carried out in compliance with the principle of the rule of law and fair judicial procedures.

The appeal must comply with Article 356 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, in particular contain a document confirming payment of the court fee, and in case of deficiencies, the provisions of Articles 185, 357 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding leaving the appeal without movement and its return apply.

The Supreme Court noted that the Law of Ukraine "On Court Fee" does not establish the obligation to submit specifically the original document confirming payment of the fee, and the verification of the fact of crediting funds to the special fund of the State Budget of Ukraine is the court's responsibility. If necessary, the court must independently request the relevant information from the State Treasury Service of Ukraine.

In this case, the LLC, in compliance with the ruling on leaving the appeal without movement, submitted a petition with a payment instruction confirming payment of the court fee, which was supported by an inventory of the enclosure. Despite the act drawn up by the appellate court about the absence of the payment instruction among the received documents, the court did not verify the fact of crediting the funds to the budget and did not take measures to obtain the relevant information.

The appellate court did not convince itself that the funds paid by the applicant were not credited to the special fund of the State Budget of Ukraine, in particular by confirming this fact with information from the State Treasury Service of Ukraine, which provides treasury servicing of this fund, and prematurely concluded that the applicant did not comply with the requirements of the ruling on leaving the appeal without movement.

More details and the text of the Supreme Court ruling dated May 20, 2026, in case No. 725/10136/24 (proceeding No. 61-1300св26) can be found at this link.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.