Twelve-Year Legal Battle continues with Groundbreaking Administrative Court of Appeal Victory

On the 2nd September 2025, the Supreme Constitutional Court, in its capacity as the Appellate Judicial Council, issued a groundbreaking judgement concerning an objection by a judge against the decision of the Supreme Court, in its capacity as the First Instance Judicial Council, regarding her transfer from the Nicosia District Court to the Larnaca District Court. This decision is of particular significance, as it sets a precedence for similar cases, defining the standard and extent of the necessary reasoning required in decisions of the Supreme Judicial Council regarding judicial relocation, as well as the criteria considered in this context. Beyond being a significant milestone for the Cypriot legal system due to the creation of judicial precedent on the critical issue of judicial functioning, this decision holds even greater importance for our office, as we were actively involved in the proceedings, representing the Interested Party. The Interested Party in the proceedings was another judge, who, as a result of the transfer of the judge who filed the objection against the Judicial Council's decision to transfer her, would have been transferred to the latter's position—i.e., from the Larnaca district to the Nicosia district.

The main grounds on which the objection was based focused, firstly on the alleged lack of reasoning in the decision of the First Instance Judicial Council regarding the transfer; whilst also on the established practice whereby the most senior judge remains assigned to the district with the greatest judicial needs. The objection, therefore, raised issues relating to judicial seniority, as well as the necessity for clear reasoning in the decisions of the Judicial Council.

By rejecting the objection and upholding the decision of the First Instance Judicial Council, the Appellate Judicial Council established key guiding principles and legal criteria which will serve as reference points for future objections of a similar nature.

In its decision, the Appellate Judicial Council emphasised the Court's ex-officio obligation to examine the objection in light of European case law. Additionally, it highlighted the need to draw guidance from the relevant guiding principles and practices developed within the framework of the Council of Europe, thereby ensuring compliance with European standards of justice and promoting cross-border harmonization of legal practices. Furthermore, turning its focus to Cyprus, the Appellate Judicial Council pointed out that judicial transfers are conducted by a purely judicial and independent body, which guarantees objectivity and impartiality in the process. At the same time, it stressed that every objecting party is further granted the right to challenge the decision of the First Instance Judicial Council before the Appellate Judicial Council, which, as the highest judicial authority, has the competence and authority to conduct a full and impartial review of the legality of such decisions.

Furthermore, the pressing need for the proper and effective administration of justice within the Cypriot society was emphasised, taking into account the small size of the country and its specific needs. In this context, the existence of a judicial transfer system is considered essential to ensure the smooth functioning of courts throughout the country.

A definite factor in the decision of the Appellate Judicial Council was also the fact that, by accepting their appointment, a judge automatically accepts the condition of potential transfer to another district, depending on the needs of the judicial service.

In conclusion, according to the Appellate Judicial Council, the long-term stay of a judge in a single district, as in the present case, is undesirable and constitutes adequate and appropriate justification for their transfer; this is for self-evident reasons, related, but not limited to the need to safeguard objective impartiality. Furthermore, a judge’s seniority cannot serve as an obstacle to their transfer, as such a stance would create the impression of unequal treatment.