Challenging actions of the enforcement service

Enforcement is the stage at which a judgment turns into an actual result. Mistakes by the enforcement officer can both block recovery and affect the debtor’s property without any basis.

When to get in touch

• the enforcement officer is not taking steps to enforce the judgment
• property or accounts have been seized without proper grounds
• enforcement has been levied against property that is exempt
• enforcement proceedings have been opened or closed improperly

What the lawyer does

• analyses the enforcement file
• prepares complaints against the officer’s decisions, acts or omissions
• applies to the court: in civil and commercial cases – to the court that heard the case, and for decisions of other bodies – to the administrative court
• works to have unfounded seizures lifted
• represents either the creditor or the debtor
• keeps actual enforcement of the judgment under review

Where to challenge an enforcement officer’s decisions, acts or omissions

The route depends on what decision is being enforced (Article 74 of the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings”):

• a court judgment in a civil or commercial case – a complaint is filed with the court that heard the case at first instance (Article 447 and part 1 of Article 448 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine; Article 339 and part 1 of Article 340 of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Ukraine);
• decisions of other bodies or officials – a claim is filed with the administrative court (part 2 of Article 74 of the Law; Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine). The defendant is the state enforcement service body or, in cases concerning a private enforcement officer, the private enforcement officer themselves (part 3 of Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure).

In addition, the creditor and other participants in the enforcement proceedings, except the debtor, may challenge a state enforcement officer’s decisions, acts or omissions before the head of the division to which the officer directly reports (part 3 of Article 74 of the Law). Such a complaint is filed in writing only, and the law sets out what it must contain (part 4 of Article 74 of the Law).

Time limits

A complaint (claim) to the court must be filed within ten days of the day the person learned or should have learned of the breach of their right, and within three days where an order postponing enforcement action is challenged (Article 449 of the Civil Procedure Code, Article 341 of the Code of Commercial Procedure, part 2 of Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure). The Law “On Enforcement Proceedings” gives 10 working days for challenging an officer’s decisions and acts in enforcing a court judgment (part 5 of Article 74), so it is safer to rely on the shorter period in the procedural code. The court may restore a missed time limit for valid reasons – the motion must be filed together with the complaint (part 2 of Article 449 of the Civil Procedure Code, part 2 of Article 341 of the Code of Commercial Procedure).

The court considers the complaint within twenty days of accepting it; in exceptional cases this period may be extended by no more than twenty days (part 1 of Article 450 of the Civil Procedure Code, part 1 of Article 342 of the Code of Commercial Procedure). The administrative court decides the case within twenty days of opening proceedings (part 4 of Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure). If the complaint is well founded, the court sets aside the decision complained of, declares the acts or omissions unlawful and orders the officer to remedy the breach (part 2 of Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Code, part 2 of Article 343 of the Code of Commercial Procedure).

Account seizure and its removal

Enforcement is directed first of all at the debtor’s funds in accounts (part 2 of Article 48 of the Law). The officer seizes the funds found no later than the next working day, and the seizure also covers accounts opened after the seizure order is issued (part 2 of Article 56 of the Law).

The officer lifts the seizure from all or part of the debtor’s funds, in particular where (part 4 of Article 59 of the Law):

• the officer has received documentary confirmation that the account has a special regime of use and/or that enforcement against such funds is prohibited by law;
• the amount needed to satisfy the claims of all creditors and to cover the enforcement fee, enforcement expenses and fines has been received in the officer’s account;
• the officer has received a court decision cancelling the measures securing the claim.

If a bank or another payment service provider has confirmed that enforcement against the funds in the account is prohibited, the officer must lift the seizure no later than the next working day (part 2 of Article 59 of the Law). Enforcement may not be levied, in particular, on severance pay on dismissal, maternity benefit, one-off childbirth benefit, child benefits, or assistance for medical treatment and for funerals (part 1 of Article 73 of the Law). In other cases, a seizure may be lifted by a court decision (part 5 of Article 59 of the Law). If the seized property belongs not to the debtor but to another person, that person may bring a claim in court for recognition of their ownership of the property and removal of the seizure (part 1 of Article 59 of the Law).

Legal basis

The procedure for enforced execution of judgments is set out in the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings”: enforcement against funds – Article 48, seizure – Article 56, lifting of seizure – Article 59, funds exempt from enforcement – Article 73, challenges to enforcement officers’ decisions, acts or omissions – Article 74. Judicial control over enforcement of court judgments in civil cases – Articles 447–451 of the Civil Procedure Code, in commercial cases – Articles 339–343 of the Code of Commercial Procedure; challenges concerning enforcement of decisions of other bodies – Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure. In an administrative case, the burden of proving the lawfulness of a public authority’s decision, act or omission rests on the defendant (part 2 of Article 77 of the Code of Administrative Procedure).

Legislation and case law are updated over time; this page reflects the position as of November 2026.

Frequently asked questions

Do I challenge the officer or the service?

It depends on the procedure. A complaint to the court in a civil or commercial case names the state enforcement officer or other official of the state enforcement service, or the private enforcement officer, whose decisions, acts or omissions are challenged (item 4 of part 3 of Article 448 of the Civil Procedure Code). In the administrative court, the defendant is the relevant state enforcement service body or, in cases concerning a private enforcement officer, the private enforcement officer themselves (part 3 of Article 287 of the Code of Administrative Procedure).

Can an account be unfrozen within enforcement proceedings?

Yes, where there are grounds. If funds exempt from enforcement are paid into the account, or the account has a special regime of use, the officer must lift the seizure once this is confirmed by documents (part 2 and item 1 of part 4 of Article 59 of the Law “On Enforcement Proceedings”). If the officer fails to do so, the omission can be challenged in court within ten days.

Can the debtor complain to the head of the enforcement division?

No. A state enforcement officer’s decisions, acts or omissions may be challenged before the head of the division by the creditor and other participants in the enforcement proceedings, except the debtor (part 3 of Article 74 of the Law “On Enforcement Proceedings”). The debtor protects their rights through the court.

Need legal assistance? Call us or leave a request – a lawyer will contact you and explain what to do in your situation.