Official Investigation and Disciplinary Proceedings: What Is the Difference and When Is Disciplinary Action Possible

The Kherson Court of Appeal explained the differences between an official investigation, disciplinary proceedings, and holding an employee disciplinarily liable, emphasizing that these concepts are not identical.

Official investigation – is an internal review of the circumstances of a certain event, actions, or inactions of an employee or official. Its purpose is to clarify the facts: what exactly happened, who was involved, whether official duties, internal labor regulations, legal requirements, or other mandatory rules were violated.

The general principles for conducting an official investigation are defined, in particular, by the Procedure for Conducting an Official Investigation, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 950 dated June 13, 2000.

Disciplinary proceedings have a different legal nature. They are aimed not only at establishing facts but also at resolving the issue of the existence of a disciplinary offense and the possibility of applying disciplinary sanctions to the person.

The court reminded that the general procedure for holding employees disciplinarily liable is defined by the Labor Code of Ukraine. In particular, Article 147 of the Labor Code establishes the types of disciplinary sanctions, Article 148 regulates the terms of their application, and Article 149 sets the procedure for imposing such sanctions.

However, conducting an official investigation does not automatically mean holding an employee disciplinarily liable. Such an investigation may only be a stage of collecting and verifying information, while disciplinary sanctions are allowed only if a violation, the employee's fault, and compliance with the legally established procedure and deadlines are confirmed.

Before making a decision on applying disciplinary sanctions, the employer or authorized body is obliged to clarify all circumstances of the case, obtain explanations from the employee, assess the severity of the offense, the amount of damage caused, the circumstances of its commission, and consider the employee's previous work.

Separate rules apply to civil servants. Issues of their disciplinary liability are specifically regulated by the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service." In particular, Article 65 of this Law defines the grounds for holding a civil servant disciplinarily liable and lists disciplinary offenses.

The procedure for disciplinary proceedings regarding a civil servant is carried out in accordance with the Procedure for Conducting Disciplinary Proceedings, approved by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine Resolution No. 1039 dated December 4, 2019. Such proceedings begin with the issuance of an appropriate order or directive about its initiation.

In disciplinary proceedings concerning a civil servant, a disciplinary case is formed. Within its framework, the circumstances of the disciplinary offense, the presence of guilt, the severity of the violation, the damage caused, mitigating or aggravating circumstances, as well as the civil servant's previous behavior, are clarified.

An official investigation concerning a civil servant may also be conducted, but it should not be equated with disciplinary proceedings. The official investigation aims to verify facts and circumstances, while disciplinary proceedings resolve the issue of the existence of a disciplinary offense and the possibility of applying disciplinary sanctions.

Judicial practice also emphasizes the need to follow a substantive rather than formal approach to disciplinary liability.

Thus, in the Supreme Administrative Court ruling dated December 23, 2025, in case No. 420/19301/21, the Supreme Court stated that to apply disciplinary sanctions, all elements of the disciplinary offense must be established and circumstances relevant to the decision must be taken into account.

In the Supreme Administrative Court ruling dated December 11, 2025, in case No. 620/3691/24, the Supreme Court emphasized that merely citing legal provisions in the order without proper reasoning for applying certain legal norms or not applying others when choosing the type of disciplinary sanction, as well as failing to state the circumstances of the disciplinary offense, is not a proper justification of the contested order.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in its ruling dated December 11, 2018, in case No. 810/1224/17 formulated an important conclusion: in matters of disciplinary liability of civil servants, the Law of Ukraine "On Civil Service" is special, so its provisions take precedence over the general norms of labor legislation.

Therefore, formal conduct of the review or merely referring to the conclusions of the official investigation is not sufficient. In case of dispute, the court verifies whether the fact of violation was properly proven, whether the procedure was followed, whether the person had the opportunity to provide explanations, and whether the applied sanction is proportional to the established circumstances.

Thus, an official investigation is a tool for establishing facts, while disciplinary proceedings are a procedure for resolving the issue of liability. They should not be equated, as the correct distinction between these concepts ensures the legality of managerial decisions and the protection of the rights of employees or civil servants.

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.