Paid a 17,000 UAH fine to the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center, but the court canceled it: is it possible to get the money back

The Khmelnytskyi City District Court concluded that if the decision to impose an administrative fine was canceled by the court, and the funds paid under it remained in the state budget, the person has the right to demand their return as unjustly retained (withheld) funds based on Article 1212 of the Civil Code of Ukraine. The court also noted that in such a case, the procedure for returning mistakenly or excessively credited funds provided by Order No. 787 does not apply, since after the cancellation of the decision, the legal basis for the state to withhold these funds ceased to exist. This conclusion corresponds to the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.

Case circumstances

In May 2025, the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center issued a decision against a citizen to bring him to administrative responsibility under Part 3 of Article 210 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and imposed a fine of 17,000 UAH. The man voluntarily paid the fine to the State Budget of Ukraine.

Disagreeing with the decision, he appealed it to the court. By the decision of the Dunayivtsi District Court of Khmelnytskyi region, the decision to bring to administrative responsibility was canceled, and the proceedings in the case of the administrative offense were closed. After this decision came into legal force, the legal basis on which the state continued to withhold the paid funds ceased to exist.

After that, the citizen applied for a refund. However, his request was left without consideration, indicating the need to submit an application to the body that controls the collection of the relevant budget revenues. In turn, the Main Department of the State Treasury Service also refused to return the funds, referring to the procedure defined by the Order approved by the Ministry of Finance’s Order No. 787. After that, the man filed a lawsuit to recover unjustly retained (withheld) funds from the State Budget of Ukraine.

The Treasury’s position

The Treasury representative opposed the claim. He stated that the fine was properly credited to the state budget, and its return should be carried out according to Order No. 787 — upon submission by the body controlling the collection of the relevant budget revenues. According to the defendant, this mechanism is the proper way to return funds after the cancellation of the administrative penalty decision.

What the court decided

The court satisfied the claim.

It noted that according to Article 1212 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, a person who has acquired or retained property at the expense of another person without sufficient legal grounds is obliged to return it. This provision also applies when the legal basis for acquiring or retaining the property later ceases to exist. This is exactly the situation that arose after the cancellation of the decision to impose an administrative fine.

The court in case No. 674/309/26 also referred to the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, set out in the decision dated August 8, 2023, in case No. 910/5880/21. The Grand Chamber explained that Order No. 787 regulates the return of mistakenly or excessively credited funds to the budget. At the same time, funds paid to enforce a decision on an administrative penalty, which was later canceled, are not mistakenly or excessively credited. After the cancellation of such a decision, they are retained in the budget without sufficient legal grounds, so the person has the right to demand their return by filing a claim based on Article 1212 of the Civil Code of Ukraine.

Moreover, the court noted that in case No. 910/5880/21, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court departed from the conclusion of the Supreme Court set out in the decision dated July 10, 2019, in case No. 489/6624/15-ts, according to which the return of such funds should be carried out exclusively out of court according to Order No. 787. Thus, the Grand Chamber formed a new approach to resolving disputes regarding the return of funds that are unjustly retained in the state budget after the cancellation of a decision imposing a fine.

In view of this, the Khmelnytskyi City District Court recovered from the State Budget of Ukraine in favor of the plaintiff 17,000 UAH of unjustly retained (withheld) funds, as well as 1,331.20 UAH of paid court fees.

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