1. The subject of the dispute is the lawfulness of the order of the Lviv Customs regarding the imposition of a disciplinary sanction in the form of a reprimand on an employee for inadequate control over the actions of subordinates.
2. The court of first instance, with which the appellate court agreed, granted the employee’s claim, based on the fact that the order on disciplinary action does not contain all the necessary information about the elements of the disciplinary offense. In particular, the courts noted that the order does not specify which actions the employee committed unlawfully or did not commit, and also did not prove the causal link between his actions and the violations committed by subordinates. At the same time, the appellate court referred to the previous legal position of the Supreme Court, according to which it is not enough to simply refer to the norms of legislation, it is necessary to provide justification for the application of these norms and specific circumstances of the offense. The Supreme Court, however, did not agree with these conclusions, noting that the appealed order contains sufficient justification for the grounds for disciplinary action, in particular, the essence of the offense is disclosed, there is a reference to the violated norms of law, and the choice of this particular type of sanction is justified. The Supreme Court emphasized that the courts had to verify the facts of violation of customs legislation by subordinates and whether they were held liable, and also establish a causal link between the actions of the manager and the violations of subordinates.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
