Evidence from criminal proceedings can be used in commercial disputes – Supreme Court
Evidence obtained within the framework of criminal proceedings may be used in commercial litigation if it relates to the subject of proof, and therefore a ruling on the closure of criminal proceedings cannot be ignored solely because it originates from another type of legal process. The commercial court is obliged to evaluate all evidence and arguments of the parties according to the standard of the likelihood of evidence.
This conclusion was made by the panel of judges of the Cassation Commercial Court within the Supreme Court.
The State Environmental Inspectorate filed a lawsuit to recover over UAH 1.7 million in damages from a permanent forest user caused by illegal tree cutting.
The basis for the claim was the results of an inspection during which inspectors recorded violations and calculated the amount of damage.
The forest user disagreed and noted that the criminal proceedings regarding these circumstances were closed due to the absence of a crime.
Decision of the court of first instance and the appellate court
The commercial court of first instance satisfied the claim. The appellate commercial court left the decision unchanged, indicating that the closure of criminal proceedings is irrelevant to resolving the dispute over damage compensation, since the decisive factor is the fact that the permanent forest user violated duties regarding forest protection and conservation.
Position of the Supreme Court
Reviewing the case, the Cassation Commercial Court of the Supreme Court noted that current procedural legislation does not prohibit the use of evidence obtained in other proceedings, including criminal ones, in commercial cases. Such evidence is subject to evaluation by the court on general grounds regarding its relevance, admissibility, reliability, and credibility.
The Cassation Commercial Court stated that evidence obtained in criminal proceedings may be used in commercial litigation if it contains information about circumstances that are part of the subject of proof. Therefore, the ruling on the closure of criminal proceedings was subject to examination and evaluation on par with other evidence in the case.
The Supreme Court found that the lower courts did not actually examine the content of the investigator’s ruling and did not evaluate the conclusions set forth therein. Instead, they limited themselves to a formal reference to the difference in the subject matter of criminal and commercial proceedings. According to the Cassation Commercial Court, such an approach indicates excessive formalism and violation of the requirements for comprehensive, complete, and objective examination of evidence.
In view of the above, the Cassation Commercial Court satisfied the cassation appeal, annulled the decisions of the lower courts, and remanded the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
The ruling of the Cassation Commercial Court of the Supreme Court dated June 4, 2026, in case No. 906/1325/25.
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.
