The Supreme Court explained when the court will return a claim without opening proceedings
Paragraph 5 of part four of Article 169 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine is an independent ground for returning a claim if the plaintiff has filed another claim to the same court against the same defendant with the same subject and on the same grounds, and no relevant ruling has been made regarding that claim at the time of deciding on the opening of proceedings. This provision aims to prevent multiple identical proceedings, ensure the principle of legal certainty, and save judicial resources. This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the Administrative Cassation Court.
On April 30, 2026, the Administrative Cassation Court of the Supreme Court considered the cassation appeal of a Private Enterprise against the ruling of the Kyiv District Administrative Court dated October 9, 2023, and the decision of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal dated September 29, 2025, in case No. 640/13538/22 filed by the Private Enterprise against the Main Department of the State Tax Service in Kyiv and the State Treasury Service of Ukraine regarding the recovery of funds.
CASE CIRCUMSTANCES
The Private Enterprise filed a claim to recover penalties, inflation losses, 3% annual interest for late budgetary VAT reimbursement, as well as moral damages and other expenses from the State Budget of Ukraine.
Previously, the plaintiff had already filed an identical claim with the Kyiv District Administrative Court (case No. 320/10920/23), which was left without action at the time of filing the second claim.
In case No. 640/13538/22, the Kyiv District Administrative Court returned the claim to the plaintiff based on paragraph 5 of part four of Article 169 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine. The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal upheld this ruling.
The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and left the contested court decisions unchanged.
COURT'S ASSESSMENT
The provision of paragraph 5 of part four of Article 169 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine is aimed at preventing parallel consideration of identical disputes by the same court, which could lead to contradictory court decisions and unjustified burden on the judicial system.
The Supreme Court rejected the plaintiff's arguments that the court should have left the claim without action or waited for the resolution of the first case, as the court of first instance acted within its procedural powers.
The cassation court confirmed that the claims in cases No. 320/10920/23 and No. 640/13538/22 are identical in terms of parties, subject matter, and grounds.
At the time of the ruling on returning the claim in the second case, no ruling had been made regarding the opening of proceedings, return, or dismissal of the first case. The existence of an identical claim for which no procedural ruling has been made during the decision on opening proceedings is a sufficient and independent ground for returning the claim.
More details and the full text of the Supreme Court ruling dated April 30, 2026, in case No. 640/13538/22 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 pages on Facebook and Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.
