FIFTH SECTION      CASE OF SHESTOPALOVA v. UKRAINE (Application no. 55339/07)            JUDGMENT   STRASBOURG 21 December 2017   This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.In the case of Shestopalova v. Ukraine,The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of: Nona Tsotsoria, President, Síofra O’Leary, Lәtif Hüseynov, judges,and Anne-Marie Dougin, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,Having deliberated in private on 28 November 2017,Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:PROCEDURE1. The case originated in an application (no. 55339/07) against Ukraine lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Ukrainian national, Ms Danuta Zbignevna Shestopalova (“the applicant”), on 19 November 2007.2. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, most recently Mr I. Lishchyna of the Ministry of Justice.3. The applicant complained under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention that there had been a violation of her right of access to a court.4. On 27 May 2013 the application was communicated to the Government.THE FACTSI. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE5. The applicant was born in 1971 and lives in Melitopol.6. Between 2004 and 2006 the applicant was head of Melitopol City Council’s Disadvantaged Persons’ Welfare Centre (Центр по обслуговуванню одиноких, непрацездатних та малозабезпечених громадян Управління праці, соціального захисту та житлових субсидій Мелітопольської міської Ради – “the Centre”). On 21 April 2006 she was dismissed as part of a reorganisation of the Centre. Another person was subsequently appointed to a position similar to the one previously occupied by the applicant.7. In May 2006 the applicant instituted civil proceedings in the Melitopolskyy Local Court (“the Melitopolskyy Court”) seeking reinstatement, salary arrears and compensation for non-pecuniary damage. On 24 October 2006 the court rejected the applicant’s claim. It found that the Centre had offered the applicant another position but that she had rejected this proposal, and that a more experienced person had been appointed as the head of the Centre. Following an appeal by the applicant, on 7 December 2006 the Zaporizhzhya Regional Court of Appeal upheld the decision of 24 October 2006. The applicant lodged a further appeal, and on 22 August 2007 the Supreme Court of Ukraine quashed these decisions and remitted the case to the first-instance court for fresh consideration. It held that the case was to be considered under the administrative justice procedure since it concerned a public-service dispute.8.

Article of the Convention at issue: Article 6
Outcome: violation