13 years of struggle for the mantle: the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court in the case of a dismissed judge

After the ECHR decision, the Supreme Court opened the way for a new consideration of the case of dismissal of a judge for “breach of oath”

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the resolution of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine in the case of judge Andriy Kozak, who was dismissed in 2013 for “breach of oath”. The decision was another consequence of the conclusions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding systemic problems in the procedure for dismissing Ukrainian judges.

How the case began

The history of this process began back in 2012, when the High Council of Justice established the fact of alleged breach of oath by judge Andriy Kozak of the Dovhyntsivskyi District Court of Kryvyi Rih.

The basis for the disciplinary prosecution was his participation in the consideration of a criminal case, the verdict in which was later partially overturned due to public outcry and the lenient punishment.

On May 23, 2013, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted a resolution on the dismissal of a number of judges, including Andriy Kozak.

The Supreme Administrative Court refused, the ECHR found a violation

After his dismissal, the judge appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine, but the court refused to satisfy the claim, recognizing the procedure as lawful.

Having exhausted national protection mechanisms, the applicants appealed to Strasbourg.

Initially, the ECHR in the case “Kulikov and Others v. Ukraine” in 2017 already drew attention to the problems of the procedure for dismissing judges in Ukraine. And on November 7, 2025, the Court adopted a separate decision in the case “Kozak and Others v. Ukraine”.

What the ECHR established

The European Court of Human Rights concluded that the procedure for dismissing judges for “violation of the oath”, which was in force in Ukraine at that time, did not meet the standards of independence and impartiality.

The Court found a violation of:

Article 6, paragraph 1 of the Convention — the right to a fair trial;

Article 8 of the Convention — the right to respect for private life.

The decision emphasized that further review of the cases by the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine could not correct the shortcomings of the dismissal procedure itself.

The Grand Chamber opened the way for a new review

On January 14, 2026, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court renewed the deadline for appeal, although more than 10 years had passed since the dismissal.

The court applied the provisions of the CAS of Ukraine, which allow for a review of the case after a final decision by an international judicial institution.

On April 30, 2026, the Grand Chamber in case No. P/800/376/13 annulled the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine of August 28, 2013 and referred the case for a new review to the Cassation Administrative Court within the Supreme Court.

Why this decision is important

This case became another example of how the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights can change the final decisions of Ukrainian courts even many years later.

In fact, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court removed the main procedural obstacle to a new consideration of the case and opened the possibility of a reassessment of the legality of the dismissal of a judge.