1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the actions of the High Administrative Court of Ukraine regarding the calculation and payment to Judge PERSON_1 of judicial remuneration, financial assistance for health improvement, and severance pay in connection with retirement, calculated without taking into account the basic salary of a judge of a higher specialized court and the subsistence minimum for able-bodied persons, established as of January 1 of the calendar year.
2. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, when considering cassation appeals, proceeded from the fact that the key issue is determining the date from which judges of higher specialized courts that are being liquidated are equated to judges of higher specialized courts in the event of retirement. The court noted that the legislator linked the application of regulations regarding the equating of judges in status and level of monetary support with the fact of transfer to another court or retirement. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed with the arguments of the cassation appeals that, for judges who have expressed a desire to retire, the guarantees begin to apply from the moment the High Council of Justice makes a decision on their retirement, and not from the moment Law No. 3481-IX comes into force. Also, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court took into account the Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, which declared unconstitutional a separate provision regarding the guarantees defined by Law No. 2453-VI for judges of higher specialized courts until the termination of their activities. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court noted that until the repeal of this provision, the judicial remuneration for judges of the High Administrative Court of Ukraine was determined by Law No. 2453-VI. Regarding the application of the subsistence minimum, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court indicated that the laws on the State Budget of Ukraine for the relevant year established the subsistence minimum for able-bodied persons specifically for the purpose of determining the basic amount of the judge’s salary.
3. The court reversed the decisions of the courts of previous instances and dismissed the claim of PERSON_1.
**** The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court departed from the conclusions of the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, set out in the resolutions of July 13, 2023, in case No. 280/1233/22, of March 21, 2024, in case No. 620/4971/23, and others.
