Ukrainian law

Legal news in Ukraine: The Law on the termination of the Treaty of Friendship with Russia came into force, The Ukrainian lawyer was deprived of the right to represent the complainants in the ECHR, new rulings of Supreme Court

16.12.2018 / 12:00
81
+A
-a

Legal news in Ukraine: The Law on the termination of the Treaty of Friendship with Russia came into force, The Ukrainian lawyer was deprived of the right to represent the complainants in the ECHR, new rulings of Supreme Court

The Law on the termination of the Treaty of Friendship with Russia came into force

On December 12, 2018, the Law on the Termination of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation came into force. It was published in the «Voice of Ukraine» on December 11.

The Law terminates the Treaty from April 1, 2019, due to aggression on the part of Russia.

«The termination of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation shall relieve Ukraine of any obligation to implement it and shall not affect the rights, obligations or legal position of Ukraine arising as a result of the execution of the Treaty for termination his actions, in accordance with Article 70 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties», states the legislative act.

The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation was adopted on May 31, 1997 in Kyiv and ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on January 14, 1998.

The Congress of Advocates of Ukraine will be held on February 15-16, 2019

The Congress of Advocates of Ukraine will be held on February 15-16, 2019. This decision The Council of Advocates of Ukraine adopted at a meeting on Thursday, December 13.

In accordance with the laws «On the High Council of Justice» and «On the Judiciary and Status of Judges», the powers of the representatives of the Bar to the High Council of Justice and the High Qualifications Commission of Judges of Ukraine are completed on April 30 and June 3, 2019, respectively. Therefore, the election of the advocates to these bodies should take place within the statutory time limits.

The council of advocates has also defined the quota for representation at the congress: 1 delegate from 250 lawyers, which are entered into the Uniform Register of Advocates of Ukraine, but not less than 5 delegates from each region. The quota for the selection of reserve delegates is at least 3 from the region.

The congress approves the rules of conduct, will listen to the reports of the chairman of the Council of Advocates, the High Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of the Bar and the High Audit Committee, reports on the use of the Ukrainian National Bar Association’ funds, etc.

The venue will be determined by the Council of Advocates until the end of this year.

The head of the Judicial Protection Service has been elected

On December 12, 2018, the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine hosted a meeting of the Commission to conduct a competition for vacancies of the Head of the Judicial Protection Service and his deputies.

The contest committee allowed three candidates to participate in the competition.

To the committee meeting arrived two candidates, who successfully solved situational tasks developed by the Commission. They were allowed to interview. Applicants have shown profound knowledge and high level of professional training.

The commission has determined the overall rating of candidates and according to the results of the rating the winner of the competition is Major-General Bondar Valeriy Ivanovych

The Ukrainian lawyer was deprived of the right to represent the complainants in the ECHR

The European Court of Human Rights has decided, in accordance with Rule 36 (4) (b) of the Rules of Court, to deprive lawyer Natalia Tselovalnychenko of the opportunity to represent the interests of applicants or to provide them with legal assistance in cases filed before the Court, reports the press service of the court.

The lawyer provided the court with false information and abused the right to apply to the Court. In particular, Tselaluvnychenko provided the court with documents containing obvious signs of falsification. In other cases, she lodged applications on behalf of the deceased, without informing the Court of their death.

Applicants whose interests the judge represented or planned to represent will be warned about the decision - by mail or through the media.

Applicants may at any time nominate a different representative instead. If they do not appoint a new representative at once, they will be given such an opportunity at subsequent stages of the proceedings.

The Ukrainian government is invited to inform the Ukrainian National Bar Association about the decision and the reasons for its adoption.

At the same time, the Council of Advocates of Ukraine decided to turn to the Council of Advocates and Legal Associations of Europe on this occasion. The Council of Advocates declares that the announcement of a decision of the European Court of Human Rights regarding a Ukrainian lawyer confirms the presumption of guilt of a lawyer. Such an approach may have negative consequences not only for Ukrainian lawyers, but also for lawyers in other European countries where the ECHR’ judgments is a source of law.

The Supreme Court ruled on the case of a handing a report of suspicion to a judge

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, in its ruling of November 8, 2018, decided on the question of the legality and justification of written notification of suspicion to the judge not by the Prosecutor General or his deputy, but another prosecutor, reports press service of the court.

The first decree became a review of the Great Court of the Supreme Court of an appeal for the court decision of the Administrative Court of Justice on January 2, 2018.

The basis of this decision was the consideration by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of an appeal against the decision of the Cassation Administrative Court of April 2, 2018.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in its ruling of 8 November 2018 determined that the issue of the legality of a handing a report to a judge should be resolved within the framework of criminal proceedings. The assessment of these circumstances does not belong to the authority of either the High Council of Justice or the administrative court.

Supreme Court has refused to open a case concerning the appeal of the Law on the Customs clearance of automobiles

The Supreme Court refused to open the proceedings in a claim of the public organization «Bureau of Good Deeds» to the President of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on the recognition of the illegal actions of the Parliament on the adoption of the first reading of the bills «On Amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine regarding the taxation of excise tax on motor vehicles» (No. 8487 of June 15, 2018) and «On Amendments to the Customs Code of Ukraine and Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Importation of Vehicles into the Customs Territory of Ukraine» (No. 8488 of June 15, 2018), the recognition of these legal acts as illegal and their cancellation.

The claimant argued that the bills were approved in violation of the Rules of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine’ Procedure. According to the plaintiff, the President of Ukraine had to veto the specified bills, but signed them.

The Supreme Court ruled that the jurisdiction of administrative courts does not apply to disputes concerning the recognition of unlawful acts or omissions, cancellation of bills, if the procedure, established by the Constitution of Ukraine, for their consideration, approval or entry into force has been violated.

The court noted that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine does not fulfill its administrative functions while considering and adopting laws, but it implements its legislative powers. This also applies to the authority of the President of Ukraine to sign the laws adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

The ruling may be appealed to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court within fifteen days from the date of its signing.

КОМЕНТАРІ  0 + Додати коментар
Неминучість ери правосуддя в Україні donum auctoris Неминучість ери правосуддя в Україні
Утворений у процесі розгорнутої Судової реформи Верховний Суд діє. Хтось називає найвищий судовий орган в Україні н...
Суддя-спікер Інгулецького районного суду про новели відеофіксації судових засідань Феміда Суддя-спікер Інгулецького районного суду про новели відеофіксації судових засідань
Суддя-спікер Інгулецького районного суду міста Кривого Рогу Дніпропетровської області В’ячеслав Мазуренко розповів ...
«Синій кит» або квест ціною у життя: історія, яка ще не стала судовою Справа «Синій кит» або квест ціною у життя: історія, яка ще не стала судовою
Декілька років тому суспільство сколихнули численні випадки самогубств серед дітей, багато з яких, як виявилось, бу...
Січень 2019
Пн Вт Ср Чт Пт Сб Нд
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31 1 2 3
ЗАХОДИ
Опитування
  • Як ви оцінюєте нове процесуальне законодавство?

Використання будь-яких матеріалів, розміщених на порталі "Українське право", дозволяється за умови посилання на ukrainеpravo.com. При копіюванні матеріалів порталу "Українське право" для інтернет-видань обов'язковим є пряме та відкрите для пошукових систем гіперпосилання в першому абзаці на цитовану статтю або новину.
Яндекс.Метрика