{"id":6543,"date":"2025-03-10T09:28:56","date_gmt":"2025-03-10T07:28:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-620-1206-24-dated-06-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-10T09:28:56","modified_gmt":"2025-03-10T07:28:56","slug":"case-no-620-1206-24-dated-06-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-620-1206-24-dated-06-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 620\/1206\/24 dated 06\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recognition of Actions by the Territorial Administration of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine in Chernihiv Oblast as Unlawful Regarding Calculation and Payment of Judicial Remuneration at a Reduced Subsistence Minimum.<\/p>\n<p>Main Court Arguments:<br \/>\n1. The court established that when calculating remuneration, a subsistence minimum of 2,102 UAH was used instead of 2,684 UAH, which violates judges&#8217; independence guarantees.<br \/>\n2. The Supreme Court pointed to the need to clarify the participation of the State Judicial Administration in the disputed legal relations and determine its legal status.<br \/>\n3. The court emphasized that the chosen method of protection must be effective and prevent further violations of the judge&#8217;s rights.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: Rescind previous court decisions and refer the case for new consideration to involve the appropriate defendant\/co-defendant.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125656493\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recognition of Actions by the Territorial Administration of the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine in Chernihiv Oblast as Unlawful Regarding Calculation and Payment of Judicial Remuneration at a Reduced Subsistence Minimum. Main Court Arguments: 1. The court established that when calculating remuneration, a subsistence minimum of 2,102 UAH was used instead of&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[57,42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6543","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-court-practice-ukraine","category-eu-legislation-important","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6543"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6543\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6543"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}