Review of a judgment on newly discovered or exceptional grounds

Once the ordinary routes of appeal have been exhausted, the law provides a separate mechanism – review on newly discovered or exceptional grounds. It is available only on the grounds the law specifies.

When to get in touch

• circumstances have come to light that were unknown to the court when it ruled
• evidence the judgment was based on has been shown to be unreliable
• there is a decision of an international judicial body finding a violation of rights
• the ordinary routes of appeal have been exhausted

What the lawyer does

• analyses whether grounds for review exist
• assesses whether the circumstances are newly discovered or exceptional within the meaning of the law
• gathers the documents that evidence them
• prepares the request to review the court decision
• observes the time limit for lodging the request
• represents the client when the court considers the request

Newly discovered circumstances

A decision of a court of any instance that has entered into legal force may be reviewed; the request is lodged by the participants in the court proceedings (part 1 of Article 459 and Article 460 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine (CrPC)). The law recognises the following as newly discovered circumstances (part 2 of Article 459 CrPC):

• fabrication or falsification of evidence, incorrect translation of an expert’s opinion and explanations, or knowingly false testimony of a witness, victim, suspect or accused on which the judgment is based;
• the setting aside of a court decision that served as the basis for the judgment or ruling under review;
• other circumstances that were not known to the court at the time of the trial and that, on their own or together with previously discovered circumstances, prove the judgment or ruling wrong.

The adoption of new laws or other legal acts repealing those in force during the proceedings is not a ground for review on newly discovered circumstances (part 5 of Article 459 CrPC).

Exceptional circumstances

• a finding by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine that a law, another legal act or a provision of them applied by the court in the case is unconstitutional (or constitutional);
• a finding by an international judicial body whose jurisdiction is recognised by Ukraine that Ukraine breached its international obligations when the court decided the case;
• a finding that a judge committed a criminal offence, or that an investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge or court abused their powers during the criminal proceedings, as a result of which the court decision was given (part 3 of Article 459 CrPC).

The last circumstance must be established by a judgment that has entered into legal force. Abuse by an investigator, prosecutor, investigating judge or court may, where a judgment cannot be given, be confirmed by a decision or ruling closing the criminal proceedings or by a ruling applying compulsory medical measures (part 4 of Article 459 CrPC).

Time limits

• newly discovered circumstances – three months from the day the person learned or could have learned of them (part 1 of Article 461 CrPC);
• circumstances proving the convicted person’s innocence or that they committed a less serious offence – review is not limited in time (part 4 of Article 461 CrPC);
• review of a judgment of acquittal – only within the limitation periods for criminal liability (part 2 of Article 461 CrPC);
• exceptional circumstances – thirty days: from the official publication of the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine; from the day the person in whose favour the international judicial body ruled learned or could have learned that the decision had become final; from the day the judgment establishing the judge’s guilt or the abuse entered into legal force (part 5 of Article 461 CrPC).

If the time limit has been missed, the request includes a motion to renew it (clause 5-2 of part 2 of Article 462 CrPC).

Where to file the request and how it is considered

The request is filed with the court of the instance that was the first to err because it did not know of these circumstances. Where the ground is a crime committed by a judge, it is filed with the court in which that judge sat; where the ground is a decision of an international judicial body – with the Supreme Court for consideration by the Grand Chamber (Article 463 CrPC). The request sets out the circumstances that could have affected the court decision but were not and could not have been known to the court and the requester during the trial, the reasoning and the requester’s claims; documents that were not known when the court decision was given may be attached (parts 2 and 5 of Article 462 CrPC).

The court considers the request within two months of its receipt and may, by a ruling, suspend enforcement of the court decision until the review is completed (parts 1 and 3 of Article 466 CrPC). As a result, the court sets aside the judgment or ruling and gives a new court decision, or dismisses the request; the Supreme Court may also remit the case for a new hearing to the court of first instance or the court of appeal (part 1 of Article 467 CrPC). The new court decision is challenged in the manner established for decisions of the court of the relevant instance (part 2 of Article 467 CrPC). The request may be withdrawn only before the court hearing begins – and after withdrawal a new request on the same grounds cannot be filed (Article 465 CrPC).

Legal basis

The grounds for criminal proceedings on newly discovered or exceptional circumstances are set out in Article 459 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine; the right to lodge a request for review – Article 460, time limits – Article 461, requirements for the request – Article 462, the court with which it is filed – Article 463, opening of proceedings – Article 464, withdrawal of the request – Article 465, the review procedure – Article 466, the court decision following the review – Article 467.

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

Frequently asked questions

How do newly discovered circumstances differ from new evidence?

Not every new piece of evidence is a newly discovered circumstance. What counts are circumstances that were not known to the court at the time of the trial and that, on their own or together with previously discovered circumstances, prove the court decision wrong (clause 4 of part 2 of Article 459 CrPC); the request must show that neither the court nor the requester knew or could have known of them (clause 4 of part 2 of Article 462 CrPC). That is what the lawyer assesses first.

Is there a time limit for lodging the request?

Yes. The general time limit is three months for newly discovered circumstances and thirty days for exceptional ones (parts 1 and 5 of Article 461 CrPC). Review is not limited in time where the circumstances prove the convicted person’s innocence or that they committed a less serious criminal offence (part 4 of Article 461 CrPC).

Is enforcement of the judgment suspended during the review?

Not automatically. The court has the right, by a ruling, to suspend enforcement of the court decision until the review is completed (part 3 of Article 466 CrPC), so a motion for this should be filed together with the request.

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