Update on Constitutional Cases as of November 4, 2026
On November 4, 2026, the First and Second Senates resumed consideration of constitutional complaints. The court issued several rulings, adopted procedural resolutions, and decided to open or reject proceedings in various cases. Notably, the Grand Chamber extended the deadline for ruling on the complaint filed by R.I. Hryshko until December 3, 2026.
First Senate Complaints
The First Senate continued reviewing constitutional complaints submitted by the following individuals:
- Olena Pavlivna Linkevych
- Lyudmyla Petrivna Kovalchuk
- Serhii Anatoliiovych Karas
- Mykola Vasylovych Baranovskyi
- Mariya Vasylivna Lipeiko
- Larysa Oleksandrivna Stremenko
- Iryna Volodymyrivna Bahinska
- Valentyna Volodymyrivna Tymchenko
- Liubov Vasylivna Hryb
- Mykhailo Viacheslavovych Ivantsov
- Mykola Pavlovych Baranovskyi
- Lyudmyla Ivanivna Bahinska
- Mariya Ivanivna Bortnyk
- Mykola Petrovych Kovalchuk
- Mykola Dmytrovych Pavlov
- Tetyana Borysivna Stepanchenko
- Ihor Mykolayovych Sarnavskyi
- Svitlana Mykolaivna Falendysh
- Vitalii Viktorovych Rodak
- Vira Oleksandrivna Shvab
- Liliia Oleksandrivna Lytvynova
- Lyudmyla Arturivna Kovalchuk
- Ihor Petrovych Pershko
- Bohdan Serhiiovych Kondratchuk
These complaints challenge the constitutionality of paragraph 3 of Section II "Final and Transitional Provisions" of the Law of Ukraine No. 1774–VIII dated December 6, 2016, which introduced amendments to several legislative acts.
Additionally, the First Senate continued examining complaints from Nadiia Anatoliivna Trofymova and Andrii Volodymyrovych Zvarych regarding the constitutionality of Part 4 of Article 26 and paragraph 7 of Part 1 of Article 284 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. For the cases involving Nataliia Oleksandrivna Vyalykh and Oksana Leonidivna Chebotar, the court established written procedure as the form of constitutional proceedings.
On the same day, the First Senate issued a ruling rejecting the initiation of constitutional proceedings in the case filed by Yurii Yuriiovych Kuslii concerning Part 1 of Article 297-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses. Meanwhile, the Second Senate proceeded with complaints from Hryhorii Serhiiovych Syvukhin and Taras Vasylovych Andreichuk about Part 3 of Article 119 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, issuing decision No. 14-р(ІІ)/2026.
The Second Senate also continued hearings on complaints by Larysa Vladlenivna Holnyk, Volodymyr Mykhailovych Treizub, and Tetiana Fedorivna Arkhipova. This case involves the consolidation of constitutional proceedings related to the companies Promhaz City LLC, Lvivenergozbut LLC, UKR GAZ RESURS LLC, Enerhoprod Service LLC, and RTE Ukraine LLC.
Within the First Senate, the first panel of judges denied the opening of constitutional proceedings in cases filed by Yurii Viktorovych Dutov, the private enterprise "Lira," Viktoriia Ivanivna Chopko-Yurychko, and Yevhen Volodymyrovych Shevchenko. Conversely, the second panel of the First Senate authorized proceedings on the complaint submitted by Nadiia Yaroslavivna Stakhiv. Similarly, the second panel of the Second Senate initiated proceedings for the complaint lodged by Artem Valeriiovych Pytomets.
At the same time, refusals to open proceedings were recorded in the cases of D.A. Berdetskyi, P.L. Kulyk, L.R. Nediolina, and M.O. Chaus. Overall, the November 4 session marked a significant step in shaping the future course of constitutional case law within Ukraine’s judiciary.
In the Ukrainian legal framework, the constitutional complaint procedure plays a vital role in safeguarding citizens' rights and freedoms. The active handling of cases by the First and Second Senates reflects the judiciary’s commitment to addressing legislative challenges. Decisions on opening or denying proceedings have considerable implications for the application of criminal, administrative, and labor laws in Ukraine.
As the First Senate continues to address various constitutional complaints, the Grand Chamber's recent closed session has outlined the written proceedings for several significant cases. This development may influence the ongoing deliberations regarding the constitutionality of key legislative provisions. To gain further insights into these critical matters, you can read more about the recent decisions made during the Grand Chamber's session here.