The court reminded about the respectability criterion for renewing the term for appealing the decision of the VKDKA

Ignorance of a violation due to indifference to one's rights or unwillingness to find out is not a valid reason for missing the deadline for filing a lawsuit. The evidence that a person knew about the violation of his rights is, in particular, the conditions under which the person had a real opportunity to learn about the violation of his rights.

The Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal drew attention to this in its decision in case No. 640/16933/21 .
The lawyer claimed that he received the decision of the VKDKA late, so he missed the appeal deadline. He explained the objectivity of the reasons by the fact that he is an elderly person and belongs to the most vulnerable categories of persons from corona virus infection. In the conditions of quarantine measures, he tries to be in places of large crowds as little as possible. Therefore, mail is received periodically with reasonable caution, taking into account measures for personal safety and the safety of people.
The court recalled that the law provides for the establishment of procedural terms for the purpose of disciplining the participants in the process and their timely performance of certain procedural actions provided for by the procedural law. The institution of time limits in the judicial process contributes to the achievement of legal certainty in public-legal relations, and also stimulates the participants in the process to be conscientious in the performance of their duties. These terms limit the time during which such legal relations can be considered disputed. Therefore, if a person does not apply to the court for a dispute resolution within the period established by the law, the corresponding relationship acquires signs of stability.
The court also referred to the decision of the Supreme Court dated September 17, 2020 in case No. 640/12324/19, which states that the reason for missing the deadline for filing an administrative lawsuit can be considered valid if it simultaneously meets all of the following conditions:
  1. it is a circumstance or several circumstances that directly make impossible or complicate the possibility of taking procedural actions within the term defined by law;
  2. this is a circumstance that arose objectively, regardless of the will of the person who missed the deadline;
  3. this reason arose during the missed period;
  4. this circumstance is confirmed by proper and admissible means of proof.
That is, the Sixth AAS concluded, valid reasons can only be recognized as such circumstances that are objectively insurmountable, do not depend on the will of the person who filed an administrative lawsuit, are associated with really significant obstacles or difficulties for the timely execution of procedural actions, and are confirmed properly.
Taking into account the above, the lawyer's complaint was dismissed.
News of partners and mass media