CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 janvier 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 5 February 2024   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 49647/20 Sergiy Oleksandrovych USENKO against Ukraine lodged on 5 November 2020 communicated on 16 January 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE By the judgment of 17   December   2019, the Dnipro Court of Appeal allowed a private bank’s claim for the recovery of a debt under a loan agreement and ordered the applicant and his wife to pay it approximately 47,000 euros. By the decisions of 25 February, 13   April and 24   June 2020, the Supreme Court refused to grant the applicant’s requests for an exemption from paying the court fee of 40,488 Ukrainian hryvnias (the equivalent of approximately 1,500 euros) or a reduction of that fee based on his lack of funds, in support of which he provided copies of various official documents attesting that his yearly income had been approximately 60 euros and that he had had to take care of a disabled child. The Supreme Court held that pursuant to section 8 of the Court Fee Act only claimants and not defendants in civil proceedings could be released from the obligation to pay, in full or in part, a court fee. Accordingly, the applicant’s cassation appeal was not examined on the merits. The applicant complains of a violation of Article   6   §   1 of the Convention on that account.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have access to a court for the determination of his civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article   6 §   1 of the Convention, regard being had to the fact that his cassation appeal was not examined on the merits for his failure to pay a court fee (compare Kreuz v. Poland , no.   28249/95, §§   52-67, ECHR   2001‑VI; Malahov v. Moldova , no. 32268/02, §§   31-36, 7   June 2007; Ciorap v.   Moldova , no.   12066/02, §§   93-96, 19   June 2007; and Mushta v.   Ukraine , no. 8863/06, §§ 40-47, 18   November 2010)?