Bankruptcy Proceedings Were Not Opened: Can the Court Fee Be Refunded?

Before filing an application to open bankruptcy proceedings, a creditor should assess not only the prospects of the bankruptcy procedure itself. Court costs must also be taken into account, as they cannot always be recovered if the court ultimately refuses to open the case. The Commercial Cassation Court within the Supreme Court addressed this issue in case No. 910/8475/25, in which a creditor sought to recover UAH 30,280 in court fees after bankruptcy proceedings were not opened.

The Supreme Court's key conclusion was that the possibility of obtaining a refund depends on the procedural stage at which the court discontinued consideration of the application. A refusal to accept an application to open bankruptcy proceedings and a refusal to open bankruptcy proceedings after considering the application are different procedural decisions and have different consequences for the court fee already paid.

How the UAH 30,280 dispute arose

One company applied to the Commercial Court of Kyiv seeking the opening of bankruptcy proceedings against another company due to outstanding debt. The creditor paid a court fee of UAH 30,280 for filing the application. In September 2025, the court of first instance opened the bankruptcy proceedings. However, on 8 December 2025, the Northern Commercial Court of Appeal overturned that ruling and refused to open bankruptcy proceedings.

The creditor subsequently applied for a refund of the UAH 30,280 court fee. The court of first instance granted the application, but the debtor appealed. On 28 May 2026, the appellate court overturned the ruling insofar as it concerned the refund and denied the creditor's request.

In its cassation appeal, the creditor relied on paragraph 3 of part one of Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine "On Court Fees". It argued that because the opening of bankruptcy proceedings had ultimately been refused, the amount paid should be refunded. The Supreme Court disagreed with this interpretation.

Refusal to accept an application vs. refusal to open proceedings

The Supreme Court emphasized that the procedure for considering a bankruptcy application has specific features. It is governed not only by the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine "On Court Fees", but also, and with due regard to its special rules, by the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures. Consideration of an application effectively consists of two stages. At the first stage, the court verifies whether the application complies with the requirements of the Bankruptcy Code. Depending on the outcome, the court may accept the application for consideration, leave it without movement, return it, or refuse to accept it. If the court refuses to accept the application at this stage, the creditor is entitled to a refund of the court fee under paragraph 3 of part one of Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine "On Court Fees". The situation is fundamentally different where the application has been accepted and scheduled for consideration at a preparatory hearing. At this second stage, the court examines the merits of the initiating creditor's claims and determines whether the statutory grounds for opening bankruptcy proceedings exist. Following that examination, the court either opens the proceedings or refuses to do so. Such a refusal is not equivalent to a refusal to accept the application. Consequently, the ground for refunding a court fee provided for in paragraph 3 of part one of Article 7 of the Law of Ukraine "On Court Fees" does not apply in this situation.

Why the court fee is not refunded

At the preparatory hearing, the commercial court conducts a substantive examination of the creditor's claims. In particular, it determines whether a monetary obligation exists between the parties, assesses the validity of the applicant's claims, establishes whether there is a dispute over the underlying right, and determines whether the debtor satisfied the creditor's claims before the preparatory hearing. A ruling refusing to open bankruptcy proceedings following such an examination is therefore, by its procedural nature, a judicial decision made after substantive consideration of the relevant issue. The Supreme Court concluded that where the court refuses to open bankruptcy proceedings on the grounds provided for in part six of Article 39 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures, the court fee paid by the creditor is not refunded from the state budget.

Can the costs be shifted to the debtor?

The Supreme Court also distinguished between a refund of the court fee from the state budget and the allocation of court costs between the parties.

The Court noted that a preparatory hearing in bankruptcy proceedings is, to a certain extent, comparable to consideration of a case on the merits in ordinary commercial litigation. Therefore, Article 129 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine applies when determining which party should ultimately bear the costs. As a general rule, if the court refuses to open bankruptcy proceedings after considering the application at a preparatory hearing, the costs are borne by the applicant. There is, however, an important exception.

If the creditor had valid grounds for filing the application but the debtor fully satisfied the creditor's claims before the preparatory hearing, the bankruptcy proceedings will likewise not be opened. In this situation, however, the debtor must reimburse the creditor for the court fee.

The reasoning is straightforward: it was the debtor's failure to perform its obligation that forced the creditor to go to court. Payment of the debt only after the court application was filed should not leave the creditor bearing the costs caused by that failure.

Importantly, this is not a refund of the court fee from the state budget. Instead, the amount is reimbursed by the debtor as part of the creditor's court costs.