Here is the translation:
1. Subject of Dispute: Recovery of damages from the State Budget of Ukraine due to unlawful taxation of a retired judge’s lifetime monetary maintenance.
2. Key Court Arguments:
The Supreme Court indicated that the courts of previous instances formally approached the case and did not establish key circumstances. Firstly, they did not identify the proper defendant in the case. Secondly, they did not investigate evidence regarding the existence and amount of damages. Thirdly, they did not provide a legal assessment of all parties’ arguments. The court emphasized that the absence of a special law cannot be grounds for refusing compensation for damages caused by an unconstitutional act.
3. Court Decision: Annul the decisions of the first and appellate instance courts and refer the case for a new hearing for comprehensive and thorough investigation of circumstances.
