Калужна, О. М.О. М.КалужнаПалюх , Л. М.Л. М.Палюх2026-06-182026-06-182017-11-24Калужна, О. М., Палюх, Л. М. (2017). Prognostication of the activity of a new Supreme Court: problems of effective implementation of the right to a fair trial and the issues of criminal liability of judges for delivery of knowingly unfair decisions. Вісник кримінального судочинства(3), 155–173.https://ir.library.knu.ua/handle/15071834/24065In the article, based on the analysis of the Law of Ukraine «On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges», current criminal procedural law, as well as the draft laws on amending the procedural legislation, the procedural mechanisms aimed at ensuring the unity of the judicial practice of the Supreme Court, the effective realization of the right to a fair trial in the context of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, are considered. On the basis of the above-mentioned, the conclusions regarding the features of a crime, provided for in Art. 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine «Delivery of a knowingly unfair court decision» are made. The authors also infer that delivery of a knowingly unfair and unreasonable ruling of the Supreme Court on the transfer of proceedings in the Chamber (Joint Chamber or the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court), ruling of the Supreme Court on the return of the proceedings to the judges’ panel or Chamber under the provisions of a new procedural law, is the ground for bringing the judges to disciplinary liability. However, delivery of a resolution of the Supreme Court diverting from the established practice, contrary to its previous positions, is characterized by a higher degree of public danger and, consequently, is a subject matter of a crime under Art. 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In addition, by analyzing new procedural legislation the authors conclude that delivering by a court panel (Chamber or Joint Chamber) a Supreme Court resolution diverting from the established practice, contrary to its previous position, cannot be characterized by guilt in the form of negligence, except when the judge-rapporteur misrepresents the actual case in his report, thus misleading the other members of the judges’ panel. In the latter case, in the actions of a judge, a member of the panel who is not a judge-rapporteur, there is no crime provided for in Art. 375 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine.У статті на основі аналізу Закону України «Про судоустрій і статус суддів», чинного кримінального процесуального законодавства, а також законопроектів про внесення змін до процесуального законодавства розглянуто процесуальні гарантії забезпечення права на справедливий суд, забезпечення єдності судової практики в діяльності нового Верховного Суду. На основі цього зроблено висновки щодо ознак складу злочину, передбаченого ст. 375 КК України «Постановлення завідомо неправосудного судового рішення».ukSupreme Courtprocedural guaranteesthe right to a fair trialcriminal liabilityunfair court decision.Верховний Судпроцесуальні гарантіїправо на справедливий судкримінальна відповідальністьнеправосудне судове рішення.Стаття