ON THE POSSIBILITY FOR LOWER COURTS TO DEPART FROM THE LEGAL CONCLUSIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT (THE SUPREME COURT OF UKRAINE)

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the regulatory framework governing the binding nature of the legal conclusions of the Supreme Court (the Supreme Court of Ukraine) and the possibility for lower courts to depart from them. The evolution of legislative approaches to this issue is examined in the context of judicial reform and the transformation of mechanisms aimed at ensuring the uniformity of judicial practice. The authors analyze legislative amendments introduced during the period from 2015 to 2017, as well as the current model of legal regulation, according to which the authority to depart from a conclusion regarding the application of a rule of law in similar legal relations is vested exclusively in the Supreme Court. The article highlights the role of the Grand Chamber, the Joint Chambers, and the Chambers of the Supreme Court as the sole entities authorized to overrule existing precedents through the self-departure procedure, emphasizing the quasi-regulatory nature of such conclusions. It is substantiated that the absence of procedural powers vested in courts of first and appellate instance to depart from the legal conclusions of the Supreme Court does not preclude the necessity of assessing the relevance, applicability, and continued validity of such conclusions in relation to specific legal relations. The article proposes an author’s systematization of four key criteria for a judge to evaluate the possibility of applying a conclusion: changes in the statutory framework, rulings of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the unconstitutionality of relevant norms, the absence of similarity in the factual circumstances of the case, and the presence of several complementary positions. Particular attention is paid to the need to distinguish between the concepts of “departure from a legal conclusion” and “assessment of the relevance of its application.” The article concludes that ensuring the uniformity of judicial practice should be based not only on the binding nature of the legal conclusions of the Supreme Court (the Supreme Court of Ukraine), but also on their substantive and well-reasoned application by courts, taking into account the principles of legal certainty, the rule of law, and the inadmissibility of excessive formalism in law enforcement. Such an approach ensures a reasonable balance between the predictability of justice and the necessity for the individualization of the judicial decision.