UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
The Supreme Court Resolution of 25 March 2020
In January 2015, the applicant’s house was destroyed by ordnances. A commission examined the level of destruction and recognized it as inevitable. The applicant referred to the court claiming a compensation according to the Civil Protection Code, the Law on combatting terrorism and the Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The requested amount of compensation was 1 156 356,50 UAH. The applicant’s claim was rejected in the lower instance courts. The applicant appealed the decisions of the lower-instance courts and reached the Supreme Court. The latter decided that the applicant is entitled to compensation due to the state’s failure to elaborate the relevant compensation mechanism as a protection measure of the property right. Ukraine is now obliged to compensate for the damaged housing under Protocol 1 to the ECHR. There is no clear mechanism on the payment of compensations though. Therefore, the Court assigned 100,000 UAH of compensation from the State Budget of Ukraine, which is much lower than an applicant requested. However, the decision is final and cannot be disputed in Ukraine. 25 March 2020 | Judicial Body: Ukraine: Supreme Court | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness - Ukrainians | Countries: Ukraine |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (March 2020)
March 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
AJ (Ukraine)
This is an appeal against a decision of a refugee and protection officer declining to grant refugee status or protected person status to the appellants who are a mother (the mother) and son (the son). The mother is a citizen of the Ukraine. She is also a Russian citizen. The son was born in New Zealand. There is some dispute concerning his nationality but, as will be seen below, the Tribunal finds him to be entitled to Ukrainian citizenship. 17 February 2020 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Right to family life | Countries: New Zealand - Ukraine |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (February 2020)
February 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
UNHCR Comments on the Draft Law of Ukraine on
Granting Protection to Foreigners and Stateless Persons
January 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (January 2020)
January 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (December 2019)
December 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
The Supreme Court Resolution of 20 November 2019
On 26 December 2019, the Supreme Court issued a decision in a case concerning the registration of the fact of death having occurred in Donetsk NGCA. The application was submitted along with the claim for the accumulated pension debt of a deceased husband. There was no decision regarding the accumulated pension debt, since the first step concerned registration of the fact of death that occurred in the NGCA and exemption from the court fee. In its decision the Supreme Court interprets a complex legal rule which regulates the exemption from court fees in cases establishing legal facts (birth, death, marriage etc.) “that were submitted to the court in connection with armed aggression, armed conflict, temporary occupation and resulted in internal displacement, wounds, captivity or violated property rights”. The Court insisted that such exemption should be granted only if an application is submitted in relation to an armed conflict (e.g. death due to shelling or wounds), while in the present case recognition of the fact of death is related to the issue of pension. In addition to this, the Court stated that in cases related to the registration of the fact of death of those who went missing or dead during the ATO/JFO but on reasons not directly related to hostilities, the applicants are obliged to pay court fees, but may request their reimbursement. 20 November 2019 | Judicial Body: Ukraine: Supreme Court | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Internal armed conflict - Ukrainians | Countries: Ukraine |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (November 2019)
November 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
UNHCR Ukraine Legislative Updates (October 2019)
October 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports |