The Supreme Court has overturned the rulings by the first instance court and the court of appeal in the lawsuit by the late Andriy Portnov, the former deputy head of Viktor Yanukovych’s administration, against Hromadske, the news outlet reported, citing the 20 May 2026 verdict by the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Civil Court of Cassation.
The lawsuit concerned the investigation “How they robbed us of Crimea: exclusive records”, released in December 2023 by Hromadske’s senior investigator Yaroslava Volvach.
Andriy Portnov requested that the information reported in the investigation be declared inaccurate and defamatory. He also requested that the court order Hromadske to retract and remove the information.
The Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv granted the lawsuit in August 2024, ordering Hromadske to retract the information, take the investigation down from YouTube and all the content related to it from the website and social media. Moreover, the media outlet was ordered to pay Portnov UAH 170,357 in legal fees and UAH 14,534 in court fees.
In December, the Kyiv Court of Appeal upheld the ruling, only reducing the court fee.
Having tried the case in cassation, the Supreme Court concluded that the previous instances’ rulings had been unlawful in that they had failed to account for the practice of distinguishing between factual statements and value judgments, or for the broader limits of permissible criticism of public figures.
“The requirement to prove the accuracy of value judgments is unfulfillable, it goes against freedom of thought as such. And the limit of permissible criticism of a public figure is broader than in the case of a private person. Unlike the latter, the former inevitably and consciously seeks to ensure that all their words and actions are the object of close attention by journalists and the general public, therefore they must show greater tolerance [to criticism],” the Supreme Court’s ruling reads.
The court also stressed that Hromadske‘s reporting concerned issues of significant public interest.
The Supreme Court overturned all verdicts requiring Hromadske to retract and take down the reported investigation.
Yaroslava Volvach’s attorney Anastasia Burkovska said that the case concerned not just a specific media outlet or journalist, but also the right of journalists to investigate socially important topics without the risk of defamation lawsuits being used as a tool of pressure.
“The Supreme Court answered this question unequivocally. We are glad that our legal arguments about the line between facts and value judgments, about the limits of permissible criticism of public figures became part of this answer,” Burkovska said.
Furthermore, as the cassation trial was ongoing, it was reported that Andriy Portnov had been murdered. Since the dispute concerned his honor, dignity, and business reputation, i.e. personal non-property rights that are not inherited and do not allow for succession, the Supreme Court closed the proceedings in the case.
“Since the plaintiff in this case has died, the disputed legal relations do not allow for succession, and the cassation trial found that the contested court rulings were unlawful, the contested court rulings are to be cancelled and the proceedings in the case be closed,” the Supreme Court’s verdict states.
The ruling entered into force from the moment of its adoption and is final.
Andriy Portnov and his lawsuits against Ukrainian media outlets
Andriy Portnov was infamous for his lawsuits against Ukrainian media outlets, which he usually won.
On December 26, 2024, the Media Movement expressed concern with Ukrainian courts repeatedly granting Portnov’s claims against the media and civil society organizations. This is happening despite the considerable reasons to view his activities critically. In view of this.
The Media Movement supported Yaroslava Volvach and called on the President of Ukraine to submit proposals for the National Security and Defense Council to consider introducing sanctions against Andriy Portnov in compliance with the Law of Ukraine “On Sanctions”.
The Media Movement also addressed the Chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine and the High Council of Justice with an appeal to ensure transparency and objectivity in considering cases related to public figures such as Andriy Portnov. They asked that judicial decisions in these cases be reviewed for their compliance with the standards of justice and judicial ethics.
On December 28, 2024, Andriy Portnov, through his representative Karina Mikityan, appealed to the government with a demand to take the petition down. As Portnov’s representative explained, posting the petition about him violated Portnov’s rights and freedoms, and therefore was in violation of the law.
On January 8, Andriy Portnov sent an address to multiple media outlets and civil society organizations saying that he considered the Media Movement’s call to introduce sanctions against him “ratting” motivated by vengefulness and hostility.
