Reimbursement of costs incurred in the case, namely, relocation within the city limits, is not provided for by the procedural law

On December 02, 2021, the Supreme Court, as part of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation, considered in written proceedings the case of the lawsuit of Joint-Stock Company Commercial Bank "PRIVATBANK" (hereinafter – JSC CB "PRIVATBANK", the bank) against PERSON_1 for debt recovery.

The court found that the bank and PERSON_1 concluded an agreement on the provision of banking services, under the terms of which the bank granted the defendant a credit for consumer purposes in the form of an established credit limit on a payment card with payment of 30% per annum on the balance of the debt, and the defendant undertook to return the received loan and pay interest for its use. In connection with the borrower's improper fulfillment of the terms of the credit agreement, the debt arose.
The local court, with whose decision the appellate court also agreed, satisfied the claim in part, recovered from PERSON_1 in favor of the bank the debt for the body of the loan, rejected the rest of the claim.
PERSON_1 appealed to the Court of Appeal with a statement on the adoption of an additional decision on the distribution of the court costs incurred by him. In order to justify the application, he referred to the fact that he incurred expenses for transportation (trips to the court, bank, post office), for sending documents to the address of the court and the plaintiff, for paper, cartridge wear, for electricity, and also spent personal time.
The appellate court refused PERSON_1 to grant the application for an additional decision.
The Supreme Court left unchanged the decision of the Court of Appeal in view of the following.
According to Clause 3 of the first part of Article 270 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the court that made the decision may, at the request of the parties to the case or on its own initiative, make an additional decision if the court has not resolved the issue of court costs.
In accordance with the first and third parts of Article 133 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, court costs consist of court fees and costs related to the consideration of the case. The costs related to the consideration of the case include:
  1. for professional legal assistance;
  2. related to the involvement of witnesses, specialists, translators, experts and conducting an examination;
  3. related to the demand for evidence, conducting a review of evidence according to its location, securing evidence;
  4. related to the performance of other procedural actions necessary for consideration of the case or preparation for its consideration.
According to the first part of Article 138 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, the parties shall bear the expenses related to moving to another settlement of the parties and their representatives, as well as renting housing.
Reimbursement of expenses related to moving within the city limits is not provided for by the procedural law.
In accordance with the first part of Article 140 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, a person who provided evidence at the request of the court has the right to demand payment of monetary compensation for his expenses related to the provision of such evidence. The amount of monetary compensation is determined by the court on the basis of the evidence submitted by such a person of the relevant expenses.
Having established that PERSON_1 is requesting reimbursement of the cost of expenses incurred by him, which are not related to his taking procedural actions necessary for the consideration of the case or preparation for its consideration at the stage of appeal proceedings in a minor case, the court of appeal reached a well-founded conclusion on the refusal to adopt an additional decision.
You can read more about the text of the decision of the Supreme Court of December 2, 2021 in case No. 761/35926/18 (proceedings No. 61-5311св21) at the link: .
News of partners and mass media