1. **Subject matter of the dispute:** The subject matter of the dispute is the lawfulness of the return of a statement of claim filed by a liquidator of a bankrupt entity due to the non-payment of court fees and the court’s refusal to grant a deferral of such payment.
2. **Court arguments:**
* The courts of lower instances formally denied the deferral of the court fee, citing the fact that a debtor in the liquidation stage is not included in the list of persons specified by Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine “On Court Fees.”
* The Supreme Court emphasized that such an approach is excessively formalistic and violates the right of access to justice guaranteed by Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
* The Court stressed that the absence of a legal entity from the list of exempt persons does not relieve the court of the duty to individually assess its actual financial status.
* The courts failed to examine the evidence provided by the liquidator (certificates of zero balances in accounts, inventory reports on the absence of assets), which confirmed the impossibility of paying the fee.
* The Supreme Court indicated that the proportionality of restricting access to a court must be assessed by balancing the interests of the state against an individual’s right to judicial protection.
* Since the courts did not evaluate the proportionality of the financial burden, their decisions were recognized as unfounded.
* **Legal basis:** In this case, the Supreme Court relies on the positions of the Grand Chamber (in particular, in cases No. 925/1293/19 and No. 917/1219/24), which require courts to move away from a formal interpretation of Article 8 of the Law “On Court Fees” in favor of assessing the actual ability of a legal entity to pay the fee.
3. **Court decision:** The Supreme Court set aside the ruling of the court of first instance and the resolution of the appellate court, remitting the case for a new trial to the Commercial Court of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast for a proper resolution of the matter regarding the deferral of the court fee.
