★★★★★ 5.0 ON GOOGLE · CLIENT REVIEWS | AVAILABLE 24/7
The “Lexon” attorney secured the complete cancellation of a resolution imposing a fine under part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses: the court found the resolution unlawful, closed the proceedings due to the absence of the elements of an offense, and obliged the return of the overpaid court fee to the client. Below, in detail, is how we managed to protect the driver and what this victory means for everyone who has received a similar fine.
Against our client, a driver, the police drew up a resolution on an administrative penalty in the form of a fine of UAH 510 under part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, that is, for an alleged violation of the rules for using external lighting devices: the driver supposedly did not switch the high beam of the headlights to low beam in time. The situation was complicated by the fact that the client learned about the fine itself not immediately, but only when the state enforcement service seized his bank accounts. That is, the resolution had effectively entered into force, while the person did not even know about it and had no opportunity to challenge it in time.
The client insisted that there were no elements of an offense in his actions: the circumstances the police relied on did not confirm the fact of exactly the violation attributed to him. A classic question for car cases arose: is the evidence collected by the police sufficient to hold the driver liable, and was the procedure for holding them liable observed.
Attorney Vitalii Petryk prepared and filed with the court an administrative claim for the cancellation of the resolution under the procedure of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine. The defense was built along several lines at once.
First, the attorney carefully analyzed the defendant’s evidentiary base, in particular the video recordings from the police officers’ body cameras, which the body attached in confirmation of the violation. The key argument of the defense was that from these video recordings it is impossible to establish the fact of exactly the attributed violation of the rules for using lighting devices. The video captured the car, but did not prove the very event of the offense.
Second, the attorney emphasized a fundamental principle: the mere fact of driving a vehicle does not constitute the elements of an offense under part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. To hold the driver liable, the body had to prove a specific unlawful action, and not limit itself to general statements. The police did not provide the court with any other proper and admissible evidence, such as photo recording of the violation or witness statements, while the burden of proof in such cases lies precisely with the body.
Third, the case was conducted entirely remotely: the claim and all documents were filed through the “Electronic Court” subsystem. This saved the client’s time and money and made it possible to conduct the process without personal visits to the court, which is especially convenient for drivers from other cities.
The court fully agreed with the position of the defense. The contested resolution imposing the fine was found unlawful and cancelled, and the proceedings in the case of the administrative offense were closed due to the absence of the elements of an offense in the driver’s actions. This is the most favorable result for the client: not a reduction in the amount of the penalty, but its complete removal.
In addition, the court recovered court costs from the police body in favor of the client and obliged the return of the overpaid court fee. Thus, the groundlessly imposed fine was annulled in full, the seizure of funds lost its basis, and part of the defense costs was compensated at the expense of the defendant.
THE COURT DECISION
This case clearly shows several important things. A resolution on a fine can and should be challenged if you do not agree with it, since the evidentiary base of the police often turns out to be insufficient, and the procedure is sometimes violated. It is important not to miss the deadline for challenging, so as soon as you learn about the resolution, for example through the seizure of accounts, it is worth immediately turning to an attorney, because the deadline can sometimes be restored. The mere fact of drawing up a resolution does not mean your guilt: the obligation to prove the offense lies with the body, not with the driver. And finally, a car case today can be conducted remotely through the “Electronic Court”, without spending time on trips.
Yes. Even if you learned about the resolution only after the seizure of accounts, you can turn to the court and, if there are valid reasons, restore the missed deadline for challenging. In this case, that is exactly what happened: the resolution was cancelled in full.
Do not pay in haste and do not ignore the resolution. Record your version of events, gather documents, and turn to an attorney who will assess the police evidence and prepare an administrative claim for the cancellation of the resolution.
No. A car case can be conducted remotely: the claim and documents are filed through the “Electronic Court”, and participation in the hearing is possible by video or through an attorney by power of attorney.
A court fee is paid for the claim, and for such cases this is a relatively small amount, and when filing through the “Electronic Court” a discount applies. In the event of a win, the court costs may be recovered from the respondent body, as happened in this case.
The body that issued the resolution is obliged to prove the existence of the offense. If there is no proper and admissible evidence, the court cancels the resolution and closes the proceedings due to the absence of the elements of an offense.
Found yourself in a similar situation on the road? Familiarize yourself with the service Car Lawyer and Car Attorney or turn for a consultation to the attorneys of “Lexon”.
The result of each case depends on its specific circumstances and evidence. This material is of an informational nature and does not guarantee a similar result in another case.
Author: Ilona Melnychuk, attorney In Brief You can dissolve a marriage through the registry office (DRATS, the body for the state registration of civil status
It happens more often than it seems: one day you suddenly find out about the existence of a court decision issued in a case you
Grand changes await the Ukrainian business environment. As of August 28, 2025, the Commercial Code of Ukraine loses its force. This is not just a
Buying real estate is always a serious step that requires not only significant financial investment, but also thorough legal verification. To avoid unpleasant surprises, it
Buying real estate has always been a responsible step, and in the conditions of 2025, when economic instability and wartime risks intensify fraudulent schemes, it
In modern Ukraine, corporate disputes are not just legal disagreements, but real battles for control over assets that can paralyze or even destroy a company.
