Here is the detailed analysis of the court decision prepared for you:
1. The subject of the dispute is the lawfulness of the refusal of the Territorial Administration of the State Judicial Administration (SJA) to issue a certificate of judicial remuneration to a retired judge, calculated using a subsistence minimum of 3,000 UAH, for the recalculation of their monthly lifetime monetary allowance.
2. When rendering its decision, the Court was guided by the position established by the Judicial Chamber of the Administrative Cassation Court in case No. 200/2309/25, which deviated from the previous practice regarding the application of a “reduced” subsistence minimum for judges. The Supreme Court emphasized that the guarantees of judicial independence, enshrined in the Law “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges,” cannot be altered by the provisions of the Law on the State Budget, which establish artificial and distinct calculation figures. The Court stressed that the subsistence minimum established for able-bodied persons in general must be applied for the calculation of remuneration, without isolating special “judicial” indicators. Any substitution of this value with a lower one in the budget law was recognized as unlawful, as it violates the constitutional guarantees of the financial support of judges. Consequently, an increase in the general subsistence minimum automatically entitles a retired judge to a recalculation of their monetary allowance. The Court also noted that the new legislative amendments, adopted in June 2026, merely confirm the correctness of such an approach, although they do not apply to the disputed legal relations retrospectively.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the Territorial Administration of the SJA and upheld the decisions of the courts of lower instances, which had granted the claim.
