Case category No. 761/8873/25: Cases of administrative offenses (from 01.01.2019);
Administrative offenses that violate the established procedure for management;
Violation of the right to information and the right to appeal.
Sent by the court: 04/07/2025. Registered: 04/08/2025. Public access provided:
09.04.2025.
Court case number: 3/761/2480/2025
Case No. 761/8873/25
Proceedings No. 3/761/2480/2025
DECREE
IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE
April 7, 2025, Judge of the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv, Nataliya Hryhorivna Prytula,
having considered the materials received from the authorized member of the Kyiv Region Bar Council on
bringing to administrative responsibility under Part 5 of Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, a citizen:
PERSON_1, who works as Deputy Director of the State Enterprise "Agency for
identification and registration of animals», at the address: Kyiv, Borys Grinchenko St., 1, 6th floor, –
ESTABLISHED:
On March 4, 2025, the court received a report on an administrative offense, from which it is clear that,
that on 02.01.2025, in order to provide legal assistance, lawyer Lisovyi R.O. applied to
by lawyer's request No. 02/01-25 dated 02.01.2025 to the State Enterprise "Agency for Identification and Registration"
animals". By letter dated 08.01.2025 No. 58/8-11 signed by the Deputy Director of the State
The enterprise "Animal Identification and Registration Agency" PERSON_1 was provided with an incomplete
response to the lawyer's request by lawyer Lisovoy R.O., namely, information on question No. 1 was not provided,
4, 5, by which PERSON_1 violated the requirements of Part 2, Article 24 of the Law of Ukraine “On Advocacy and the Bar Association”
activity” and committed an offense provided for in Part 5 of Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses.
In the court session, PERSON_1 and his defense attorney explained that PERSON_1's actions lacked substance.
administrative offense, and therefore the proceedings in the case should be closed. 03/31/2025
The court received written explanations from the defense attorney of PERSON_1, in which the latter requests to close
case on an administrative offense on the basis of clause 1, part 1, article 247 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, justifying that,
that the draft response to the lawyer's request dated 08.01.2025 was prepared by the deputy head
of the legal department by Vyacheslav Konoval based on a memo from the head of the PEU Olena
Yagovenko (issue 09-01 dated 03.01.2025). As can be seen from the memo, all information regarding
of the answers provided in the lawyer's request was reflected in this memo. Therefore
no intent or negligence in providing incomplete or false information on
The lawyer's request is not seen in the actions of PERSON_1. Regarding the provision of incomplete and
unreliable information, an internal audit has already been scheduled at the State Enterprise "AIRT". Therefore, in the opinion of
PERSON_1's defense attorney, PERSON_1's actions do not appear to be intended to provide an incomplete answer to
lawyer's request, since the latter was not aware of the unlawful nature of his action, was not
foresaw its harmful consequences and did not want or allow them to occur. Likewise, PERSON_1's actions did not
It is also considered reckless behavior, since the latter did not foresee the possibility of an accident.
harmful consequences of his action and could not even foresee them, since he signed a practically prepared
16.04.2025, 13:56 Unified State Register of Court Decisions
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/126404948 1/4
by an official (in accordance with the duties assigned to him/her) a response to
lawyer's request according to the provided memo.
Part 5 of Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses provides for liability for unlawful refusal to provide
information, untimely or incomplete provision of information, provision of information that does not comply with
validity, in response to a lawyer's request, a request from the qualification and disciplinary commission
bar association, its chamber or a member in accordance with the Law of Ukraine «On the Bar and the Bar Association”
activity".
In accordance with Part 2 of Article 24 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Bar and Legal Practice”, a state body
authorities, local government bodies, their officials and employees, heads of enterprises,
institutions, organizations, public associations to which a lawyer's request has been sent are obliged not to
no later than five working days from the date of receipt of the request, provide the lawyer with relevant information, copies
documents, except for information with restricted access and copies of documents containing information from
limited access.
From the protocol on the administrative offense and the materials attached to it, it is clear that
On 02.01.2025, in order to provide legal assistance, lawyer Lisovyi R.O. applied to the attorney's office
request No. 02/01-25 dated January 2, 2025 to the State Enterprise "Agency for Animal Identification and Registration".
By letter dated 08.01.2025 No. 58/8-11 signed by the Deputy Director of the State Enterprise
«"Animal Identification and Registration Agency" PERSON_1 was provided with a response to the lawyer's
request from lawyer Lisovoy R.O.
At the same time, analyzing the case materials, we can conclude that in the aforementioned letter of the State Enterprise "Agency for
identification and registration of animals" No. 58/8-11 dated 08.01.2025, an incomplete response was provided to
lawyer's request by lawyer Lisovoy R.O., no information was provided on questions No. 1, 4, 5, namely: in
The answer to item 1 of the request does not indicate the position of Head of Accounting Department (Head Office);
in response to paragraph 4, it is not indicated that after September 5, 2022, for positions that were included in the staff list
of the enterprise in accordance with Order No. 111 dated 05.09.2022 was hired
Head of the Accounting Department; in response to item 5 of the request, it is not indicated that the vacant
positions at the enterprise in the period from 05.09.2022 to 05.12.2022 were: Head of the Rivne branch,
Head of the Kherson branch, specialist of the Chernihiv branch, deputy head of the Vinnytsia branch,
specialist of the 1st category of the Lviv branch, specialist of the 2nd category of the Lviv branch, specialist of the Lviv branch,
accountant of the 2nd category of the Khmelnytskyi branch, which is confirmed by the lawyer's request dated 01/13/2025
year No. 13/01-25 and a letter from the State Enterprise "Animal Identification and Registration Agency" signed by PERSON_1
No. 106/8-11 dated January 15, 2025.
PERSON_1 did not deny that his job duties included responding to inquiries
lawyers who join the State Enterprise "Animal Identification and Registration Agency".
According to Article 245 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the tasks of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses are:
timely, comprehensive, complete and objective clarification of the circumstances of each case, its resolution in an accurate manner
compliance with the law, ensuring the implementation of the decision, as well as identifying the reasons and
conditions conducive to the commission of administrative offenses, prevention of offenses,
educating citizens in the spirit of law-abiding behavior, strengthening the rule of law.
At the same time, the provisions of Article 251 of the Code of Administrative Offenses establish that evidence in a case of administrative
offense, there are any factual data on the basis of which, in accordance with the procedure established by law, the authority
(official) establishes the presence or absence of an administrative offense, guilt
of this person in its commission and other circumstances that are important for the correct decision
case. These data are established by the protocol on the administrative offense, explanations
the person who is held administratively liable, victims, witnesses, conclusion
expert, material evidence, indications of technical devices and technical means that have
photo, film, and video recording functions, including those used by a person who
is held administratively liable, or by witnesses, as well as by those working in
automatic mode, or means of photography, film shooting, video recording, including those that
used by the person being held administratively liable or by witnesses, and
also operating in automatic mode, which are used to supervise the execution
16.04.2025, 13:56 Unified State Register of Court Decisions
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/126404948 2/4
rules, norms and standards relating to road safety, the protocol on
seizure of things and documents, as well as other documents.
The obligation to collect evidence rests with the persons authorized to draw up protocols on
administrative offenses defined in Article 255 of this Code.
In accordance with Article 252 of the Code of Administrative Offences, the body (official) evaluates the evidence according to its internal
a conviction based on a comprehensive, complete and objective investigation of all the circumstances
cases in their entirety, guided by the law and legal consciousness.
Thus, during the review of the protocol, it was established that an incomplete response was provided to
lawyer's request.
The court cannot take into account PERSON_1's explanation that the draft response to the lawyer's request
dated 08.01.2025 was prepared by the Deputy Head of the Legal Department Vyacheslav
Konovalov based on a memo from the head of the PEV, Olena Yagovenko (issue 09-01 of
03.01.2025); all information regarding the answers provided in the lawyer's request was reflected in
this memo; no intent or negligence in providing incomplete or false information
information on the lawyer's request is not seen in PERSON_1's actions; PERSON_1 was not aware
the unlawful nature of his action, did not foresee its harmful consequences and did not wish for or allow them
onset; PERSON_1 signed the document actually prepared by the official (in accordance with the prescribed
her official duties) response to the lawyer's request according to the provided official note,
since this does not negate the responsibility of the authorized person for providing incomplete information on
lawyer's request.
Therefore, PERSON_1's guilt in committing an administrative offense is confirmed by the materials
administrative offense case, namely: protocol on administrative offense
offense, by lawyer's request No. 02/01-25 dated January 2, 2025, by letter of the State Enterprise "Agency for
identification and registration of animals" dated 08.01.2025 No. 58/8-11, by lawyer's request No. 13/01-25 dated
01/13/2025, by letter of the State Enterprise "Agency for Identification and Registration of Animals" dated 01/15/2025
No. 106/8-11, explanations of PERSON_1. .
In view of the above, the judge concludes that PERSON_1's actions constitute
administrative offense, provided for in Part 5 of Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and PERSON_1 is subject to
bringing to administrative liability for the committed offense in the form of a fine.
In addition, in accordance with Article 40-1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the offender is subject to
to collect a court fee of UAH 605.60, since the court did not establish grounds for dismissal
from paying the court fee.
Taking into account the above and guided by Art. 40-1, Part 5, Art. 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the judge
DECIDED:
PERSON_1 is found guilty of committing an offense under Part 5 of Article 212-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses and
to apply an administrative penalty to him in the form of a fine in favor of the state in the amount of
twenty-five tax-free minimum incomes of citizens, which is 425 (four hundred
twenty-five) hryvnias 00 kopecks.
To collect from PERSON_1 in favor of the state a court fee in the amount of UAH 605.60.
The deadline for submitting a request for the implementation of this resolution is three months from the date of entry into force of the resolution.
legal force.
A judge's ruling in a case of an administrative offense may be appealed by a person who:,
who has been brought to administrative responsibility, her legal representative, defense attorney,
the victim, his representative or the prosecutor within ten days from the date of the decision
resolutions through the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv to the Kyiv Court of Appeal.
16.04.2025, 13:56 Unified State Register of Court Decisions
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/126404948 3/4
A judge's ruling in administrative offense cases becomes legally effective after
expiration of the deadline for filing an appeal.
Judge: N.G. Prytula
16.04.2025, 13:56 Unified State Register of Court Decisions
https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/126404948 4/4