Prior to this, the plaintiff was recognised guilty by the court of first instance in the commission of an administrative offense provided for in Part 1 of Art. 164 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses. Subsequently, this decision was canceled by the court of appellate instance in the absence of the event and the structure of the offense.

In the new proceeding, the court of first instance, having considered the case in accordance with the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, partially satisfied the claims of the plaintiff, instead the Court of Appeal closed the proceedings, referring to paragraph 3 of Part 2 of Article 19 of the CAP of Ukraine, which provides that the jurisdiction of administrative courts does not apply to cases of imposing administrative penalties, except cases specified by this Code.

Having examined the plaintiff's cassation appeal, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court concluded that the drafting of a protocol on an administrative offense without a decision on bringing a person to administrative liability did not produce legal consequences for the plaintiff and did not violate his rights. Consequently, separate protocols are not disputed from the court ruling on bringing administrative liability.

Thus, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the court of appellate instance that the claim is not subject to consideration in the procedure of administrative proceedings.

To get acquainted with the full text of the corresponding decree of the Air Forces can be for link.