04071, Kyiv, st. Mezhigorskaya 39/20
(096) 833-01-61
The Poltava Court of Appeal set a significant legal precedent by examining in detail a textbook case involving a driver and patrol police. The judges examined a situation in which a car was stopped by officers without the slightest apparent justification, as the vehicle was moving in traffic without any traffic violations. After a routine document check, which revealed no discrepancies, the officers asked the driver to go to a medical facility for an intoxication test, but received a categorical and reasoned refusal. The driver's key argument was that the initial illegal stop invalidated the subsequent actions of the officers, and therefore, their binding effect on him as a driver.
Insisting on their demand, the inspectors filed a report against the man under Part 1 of Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of Ukraine, which carries a very severe penalty of a fine of seventeen thousand hryvnias and a one-year suspension of the driver's license. This report became the subject of the trial, during which the judges had to evaluate the entire chain of events, beginning with the moment the car was stopped. Video footage of the driver's behavior, which was completely calm and showed no signs of possible alcohol or drug intoxication, was subjected to careful analysis, fully consistent with his own statements.
In its final ruling of August 12, 2025, the court reached the unequivocal and fundamental conclusion that the police officers failed to provide a single objective and reasoned argument that would have allowed them to stop the vehicle in accordance with Article 35 of the Law of Ukraine "On the National Police." Since the initial action of law enforcement officers, namely the vehicle stop itself, was deemed illegal from the outset, all subsequent procedural actions, including the referral for a medical examination, automatically lost their validity. The court ruled that the citizen was not obligated to comply with the police officers' unlawful demands.
Therefore, the court deemed the reports and accompanying documents inadmissible evidence, lacking legal force for holding the driver administratively liable. This ruling is fully consistent with the established practice of the Supreme Court, which, back in 2019, in case No. 686/11314/17, clearly defined the legal position, confirming that the lack of legal grounds for stopping a vehicle renders absolutely all subsequent police demands unlawful. This ruling serves as an important reminder both for drivers of the limits of their rights and for police officers of the strict adherence to procedures that guarantee the legality of their actions.