The Council of Judges Approved New Criteria for Increasing the Number of Judicial Assistants

The Council of Judges of Ukraine approved the criteria for evaluating decisions of judges' assemblies regarding the increase of the maximum number of judicial assistants, namely: workload, urgency, level of criticality, priority, and justification.

Additionally, members of the Council of Judges recommended that assemblies of judges of local and appellate courts consider the criteria approved by this decision when preparing and making decisions on appeals to the Council of Judges of Ukraine for approval of increasing the maximum number of judicial assistants.

The corresponding decision is enshrined in Decision No. 20 dated June 5, 2026.

Currently, the Council of Judges has already received appeals from 32 courts requesting the introduction of 254 additional staff positions for judicial assistants, and new applications continue to arrive.

As noted by the Council of Judges of Ukraine, previously, amendments to the Regulations on Judicial Assistants provided for the possibility of increasing the number of judicial assistants in exceptional cases.

To approve such an increase, the assembly of judges of the respective court must appeal to the Council of Judges of Ukraine with a substantiated decision. After consultations with the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine, the Council of Judges makes a decision regarding the feasibility of such an increase.

Due to the significant number of appeals and the need to analyze the workload on courts, a special working group was created by order of the Chairman of the Council of Judges of Ukraine, Vitaliy Salikhov, on June 1. Its task is to process submitted applications, standardize the appeal procedure, and prepare relevant draft decisions.

The Council of Judges emphasized that the changes are not intended to automatically provide each judge with two assistants. Their main task is to help courts facing excessive workload and requiring additional personnel resources.

Thus, the working group proposed defining criteria for approving decisions of judges' assemblies of the respective courts on increasing the maximum number of judicial assistants and determining the priority of making such decisions, namely:

Workload - the ratio of the number of cases and materials received by the court to the number of cases and materials reviewed, as well as the dynamics of the formation of the backlog of unresolved cases. An increase in workload is proposed to be considered as a situation where, despite the increase in the number of cases reviewed per judge and the court as a whole, the backlog of unresolved cases and materials continues to grow.

Urgency - the rate of growth of the backlog of unresolved cases and their total number, the normative time required to review cases received during the reporting period, reduction in the actual number of judges, categories of cases, and other indicators affecting the level of judicial workload. The presence of urgency is caused by a significant increase in the number of cases and materials received by the court compared to the previous reporting period. Applying this criterion allows assessing the need to increase the staff number of judicial assistants in courts where, despite an average workload level, there is a sharp increase in case inflow, which may lead to a critical situation in court operations.

Level of Criticality - the degree of exhaustion of existing organizational capabilities to ensure proper administration of justice. Increasing the number of staff positions for judicial assistants beyond the established maximum number is proposed to be considered an exceptional measure that can only be applied after the full staffing of existing patronage service positions. Such a measure should be an extreme way to resolve situations related to significant judicial workload.

Priority - the population size of the respective locality, status as a million-plus city, features of territorial and subject jurisdiction, categories of cases under court consideration, proximity to combat zones, as well as other circumstances that may affect ensuring proper access to justice and continuity of judicial proceedings.

Justification - completeness, reliability, and objectivity of reflecting the actual situation in the respective court. Justification implies providing specific data on the reasons for the need to increase the number of judicial assistants, as well as defining expected results and the projected impact of such a decision on the court's efficiency and timeliness of justice administration.

The Council of Judges emphasized that none of the criteria will be decisive on its own. The mentioned criteria are to be applied collectively and taking into account the specific circumstances of the respective court's activity. The presence or absence of an individual criterion alone is not an unconditional basis for approving or denying the approval of the judges' assembly decision.

At the same time, the decision of the judges' assembly of the respective court can be approved only after evaluating each of the listed criteria.

Local and appellate courts are also recommended to consider the approved criteria when preparing decisions on appeals to the Council of Judges of Ukraine regarding approval of increasing the maximum number of judicial assistants.

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 informed about the most important events.