Overview of the Results of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine in October 2026

OVERVIEW OF THE RESULTS       OF THE HIGH QUALIFICATION COMMISSION OF JUDGES OF UKRAINE October 2026

 

Procedures of the judicial career

Competition to the appellate courts

General statistics of the competition to the appellate courts

By specialisations
Stage	Administrative	Commercial	Criminal	Civil	TOTAL
Applied with applications (1 candidate did not choose a specialisation)	191	185	912	787	2 076
Admitted to the competition and qualification assessment	173	160	821	687	1 841
Successfully passed a test of knowledge in the field of law and in the specialisation of the relevant court	132	134	703	619	1 588
Successfully passed the cognitive abilities test	105	98	507	410	1 120
Successfully completed practical assignment	67	83	452	255	857
Ranking of candidates has been approved	43	60	244		347
Recognised as winners of the competition and recommended for the appointment	42	55	171		268
Interviews are ongoing	Completed	Completed	182		182

In October, the Commission conducted interviews with 17 candidates for judicial positions in general courts of appeal:

• 4 candidates confirmed their ability to administer justice (1 at Kyiv Court of Appeal, 2 at Poltava Court of Appeal and 1 at Cherkasy Court of Appeal);
• interviews with 6 candidates will be conducted by the Commission in plenary session (4 candidates for Kyiv Court of Appeal, 1 for Volyn Court of Appeal and 1 for Poltava Court of Appeal).

On 29 October 2026, the Commission began interviewing candidates for Volyn Court of Appeal and Cherkasy Court of Appeal.

By its decisions of 28 October 2026, the Commission approved the ranking of candidates for vacant judicial positions at Rivne Court of Appeal based on the results of the qualification assessment conducted within the competition and determined 12 winners.

The winners of the competition for judicial positions at Rivne Court of Appeal are:

1. Dina Bielkina, a judge of Baranivka District Court of Zhytomyr Oblast.
2. Oksana Havrylenko, a judge of Netishyn City Court of Khmelnytskyi Oblast.
3. Nataliia Zahorodko, a judge of Korets District Court of Rivne Oblast.
4. Nataliia Kuchyna, a judge of Rivne City Court of Rivne Oblast.
5. Iryna Neznamova, a judge of Varash City Court of Rivne Oblast.
6. Mykola Panchuk, a judge of Kreminna District Court of Luhansk Oblast.
7. Olena Pershko, a judge of Rivne City Court of Rivne Oblast.
8. Sviatoslav Rohozin, a judge of Rivne City Court of Rivne Oblast.
9. Dmytro Sirak, a judge of Korets District Court of Rivne Oblast.
10. Tetiana Stashkiv, a judge of Zviahel City and District Court of Zhytomyr Oblast.
11. Oksana Tymoshenko, who has professional experience as an advocate.
12. Viktor Shevchuk, who has professional experience as an advocate.

The competition for 242 judicial positions in general courts of appeal is ongoing.

 

Competition to the Specialised Circuit Administrative Court and Specialised Administrative Court of Appeal

On 14 October 2026, the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine, in plenary session, recommended candidates for appointment as judges of the Specialised Administrative Court of Appeal. Following the competition announced by the Commission on 29 October 2025, 6 winners received recommendations.

Thus, the Commission recommended candidates for appointment to 6 of the 10 vacant judicial positions for which the competition had been announced.

Also on 14 October, the Commission approved the ranking of participants in the competition and the list of winners.

 

Recommendations for Appointment as a Judge of the Specialized Administrative Court of Appeal

 

1. Tetiana Kravchenko, a judge of Donetsk District Administrative Court

2. Oleksandr Maistrenko, a judge of Solomianskyi District Court of Kyiv

3. Alina Diska, a judge of Sumy District Administrative Court (seconded to Kyiv District Administrative Court)

4. Olena Tsarikova, a judge of Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court

5. Valerii Kravchuk, has professional experience as an advocate; legal scholar

6. Yurii Hlomb, a judge of Rivne District Administrative Court

 

Special joint sessions of the Commission and the Expert Council began on 14 September 2026. During these sessions, candidates for judicial positions at the Specialised Circuit Administrative Court had the opportunity to provide explanations regarding information that had come to the Expert Council’s attention and to answer questions from members of the Commission and the Expert Council.

On 16 October 2026, following a joint vote by members of the Commission and the Expert Council, 9 candidates were found to meet the integrity and professional competence criteria:

• Artem  Brintsov;
• Olena Doronina;
• Iryna Yerko;
• Yuliia Kitsula;
• Yaroslava Kravchenko;
• Dmytro Kuznietsov;
• Ruslana Liashenko;
• Tetiana Ruban;
• Svitlana Fuhol.

On 28 October 2026, interviews began with 10 candidates who meet the integrity and professional competence criteria.

 

Secondments

The Commission received 10 notifications from the State Judicial Administration of Ukraine concerning secondments and 1 notification concerning the early termination of a secondment.

The Commission considered the secondment of judges:

• to 11 courts due to excessive judicial workload and the inability to administer justice;
• from 5 courts due to changes in the territorial jurisdiction of court cases.

The Commission considered the early termination of the secondment of 1 judge and the judge’s simultaneous secondment to another court.

The Commission recommended seconding judges to the following courts:

• Borodianka District Court of Kyiv Oblast (1 judge);
• Zhytomyr District Administrative Court (1 judge);
• Pavlohrad City and District Court of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast (1 judge);
• Sosnytsia District Court of Chernihiv Oblast (1 judge);
• Storozhynets District Court of Chernivtsi Oblast (1 judge);
• Kharkiv District Administrative Court (1 judge).

 

Qualification assessment

for suitability of a judge for his/her position held and in connection with the imposition of a disciplinary sanction

Based on the results of the qualification assessment:

• Ruslana Sokolova, a judge of Oleksandriia City and District Court of Kirovohrad Oblast, was found to be suitable for the position held;
• Olena Tkhir, a judge of Svaliava District Court of Zakarpattia Oblast, was found to be suitable for the position held;
• Dmytro Chernov, a judge of Irpin City Court of Kyiv Oblast, was found to be unsuitable for the position held.

The qualification assessment to determine the suitability of 6 judges for their current positions was terminated following confirmation of their ability to administer justice in a court of appeal:

• Nataliia Zahorodko, a judge of Korets District Court of Rivne Oblast;
• Antonina Mykhailovska, a judge of Zviahel City and District Court of Zhytomyr Oblast;
• Iryna Neznamova, a judge of Varash City Court of Rivne Oblast;
• Sviatoslav Rohozin, a judge of Rivne City Court of Rivne Oblast;
• Dmytro Sirak, a judge of Korets District Court of Rivne Oblast;
• Tetiana Stashkiv, a judge of Zviahel City and District Court of Zhytomyr Oblast.

 

Data on the accounting of judges’ positions

The records were updated to include information on:

15 newly vacant judicial positions:

In local courts – 9:

• Fortechnyi District Court of Kropyvnytskyi (retirement – 1);
• Bashtanka District Court of Mykolaiv Oblast (Article 126, part six, paragraph 3 of the Constitution of Ukraine – 1);
• Peresypskyi District Court of Odesa (voluntary resignation – 1);
• Kriukivskyi District Court of Kremenchuk, Poltava Oblast (retirement – 1);
• Shyshaky District Court of Poltava Oblast (retirement – 1);
• Holosiivskyi District Court of Kyiv (voluntary resignation – 1);
• Zhytomyr District Administrative Court (retirement – 1);
• Chernihiv District Administrative Court (retirement – 1);
• Marhanets City Court of Dnipropetrovsk Oblast (appointment as a judge of a court of appeal – 1).

In courts of appeal – 3:

• Kyiv Court of Appeal (retirement – 1);
• Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal (retirement – 1);
• Khmelnytskyi Court of Appeal (retirement – 1).

In the Supreme Court – 3:

• Administrative Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court (retirement – 2);
• Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court (reaching the age of 65 – 1).

1 judicial vacancy filled:

In courts of appeal – 1:

• Lviv Court of Appeal – 1.

[more]

 

 

Sessions

42 sessions were held, of which:

• in plenary composition – 6;
• in chamber composition – 6;
• in panel composition – 19;
• special joint sessions of the Commission and the Expert Council – 11.

[more] – in Ukrainian

93 decisions of the Commission were adopted, of which:

• on selection and appointment of judges – 1;
• on transfer (secondment) of judges – 16;
• on verification of declarations of family ties and integrity of a judge (candidate for the position of a judge) – 4;
• on qualification assessment of judges – 6;
• on conduction of competition for filling vacant positions of judges in the high specialised courts – 27;
• on conduction of competition for filling vacant positions of judges in the courts of appeal – 30;
• on general issues – 9.

[more] – in Ukrainian

 

 

Participation in the events

6–11 October 2026 – an expert meeting on judicial integrity vetting and a side event on the same topic, organised as part of the Warsaw Human Dimension Conference on 8–9 October 2026 in Warsaw.

16 October 2026 – a kick-off meeting on the initiative to develop and implement a methodology for conducting a Case Weighting Study (CWS) in Ukraine, at the invitation of the PravoJustice4EU Project.

20 October 2026 – a working meeting between representatives of the Commission and the International Development Law Organization (IDLO), including Romualdo Tapfuma Mavedzenge, IDLO’s Director of Programmes.

21 October 2026 – the official launch event of the PravoJustice4EU Project.

23 October 2026 – a meeting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Committee on Ukraine’s Integration into the European Union.

 

Litigation

The Commission’s interests were represented at 38 hearings before the Supreme Court.

The Administrative Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court delivered the following judgments in favour of the Commission:

1. In cases No. 990/427/25 brought by Adamov A.S.; No. 990/344/26 brought by Adamenko I.M.; No. 990/207/26 brought by Danylevskyi M.A.; No. 990/45/26 brought by
   Hrebin O.O.; No. 990/111/26 brought by Shevchenko O.Y.; No. 990/597/25 brought by Tsebryk L.V.; and No. 990/374/26 brought by Silchenko V.Y., seeking declarations that decisions were unlawful, their annulment and orders requiring the Commission to take action (competition for judicial positions in courts of appeal: interview).
2. In cases No. 990/324/26 brought by Cheburov D.M.; No. 990/408/26 brought by Syrotkin S.S.; No. 990/349/26 brought by Chernysh N.A.; No. 990/366/26 brought by Chernushenko Y.A.; No. 990/365/26 brought by Kurdyna Z.I.; No. 990/151/26 brought by Drahota A.V., Panasenko T.I. and Pavlovych D.M.; No. 990/356/26 brought by
3. Remez O.Y.; and No. 990/342/26 brought by Tsapko Y.Y., seeking declarations that decisions were unlawful and orders requiring the Commission to take action (judicial selection: qualification exam, practical assignment).
4. In cases No. 990/328/26 brought by Berzin S.L. and No. 990/314/26 brought by Nastasiichuk O.V., seeking declarations that decisions were unlawful, their annulment and orders requiring the Commission to take action (judicial selection: special background check).
5. In case No. 990/233/26 brought by Ostapenko D.M., seeking a declaration that a decision was unlawful, its annulment and an order requiring the Commission to take action (competition for judicial positions at the High Anti-Corruption Court: special joint meeting).

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court delivered the following judgments:

• In cases No. 990/560/25 brought by Balabko A.V.; No. 990/393/25 brought by Tkachenko K.V.; No. 990/591/25 brought by Haidai Y.F.; No. 990/408/25 brought by
  Kostenko V.H.; and No. 990/103/26 brought by Obodovskyi O.V., the Commission’s position was upheld. In particular, where the Commission had lodged appeals, those appeals were allowed, the first-instance judgments were set aside and new judgments dismissing the claims were delivered, while the plaintiffs’ appeals were dismissed (competition for judicial positions in courts of appeal: interview).
• In cases No. 990/430/25 brought by Vynnychenko M.P. and No. 990/483/25 brought by Fedchenko I.A., the plaintiffs’ appeals were dismissed and the first-instance judgments were upheld (judicial selection: qualification examination, cognitive ability testing).
• In case No. 990/7/26 brought by Soproniuk O.A., the plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed and the first-instance judgment was upheld (2017 judicial selection: interview).
• In cases No. 990/155/26 brought by Starosieltseva O.V.; No. 990/57/25 brought by Maltyz A.V.; No. 990/175/25 brought by Zeikan I.Y.; and No. 990/227/25 brought by Myroshnykova O.Sh., the Commission’s position was upheld. In particular, where the Commission had lodged an appeal, that appeal was allowed, the first-instance judgment was set aside and a new judgment dismissing the claim was delivered, while the plaintiffs’ appeals were dismissed (competition for judicial positions in courts of appeal: qualification examination, practical assignment and cognitive ability testing).
• In case No. 990/167/26 brought by Sheptukhovskyi S.Y., the plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed and the first-instance judgment was upheld (competition for judicial positions at the Specialised Circuit Administrative Court: qualification examination).

 

Document flow

Documents were processed:

• 3 275 – incoming documents;
• 2 928 – outgoing documents.

 

Inquiries and appeals were reviewed:

• 6 lawyer’s requests;
• 43 requests for information;
• 66 appeals;
• 2 813 other inquiries.

 

Assistance in the implementation of judicial career procedures will be gladly provided, and proposals for improving Commission’s work will be considered!

9, General Shapoval Str., Kyiv, 03110, Ukraine

inbox@vkksu.gov.ua

+38 044 233 63 76