1. **Subject matter of the dispute:** Reclamation of land plots from unlawful possession (use) by a lessee whose rights were violated by the execution of new lease agreements for the same plots during the validity period of the previous agreements.
2. **Court’s arguments:** The Supreme Court proceeded from the premise that the initial lease agreements had been duly executed and registered, and therefore remained in force at the time the new agreements were concluded with another lessee. The Court emphasized that the conclusion of a new lease agreement for a land plot already under lease to another person constitutes a violation of the primary lessee’s rights. The appellate court erroneously classified the form of legal protection chosen by the plaintiff as inappropriate, as a lessee has the right to reclaim a land plot from unlawful possession pursuant to Article 27 of the Law of Ukraine “On Land Lease.” The Supreme Court underscored that the court’s task is to provide a proper interpretation of the claims, rather than formally deny the lawsuit, if the plaintiff’s intent to protect their rights is evident. The Court further noted that the registration of the lease right for a new lessee makes it impossible for the primary lessee to exercise their rights; therefore, a court decision is a necessary instrument for restoring the lawful status. In this case, the Court effectively departed from a formalistic approach to modes of legal protection, indicating that the non-conformity of claims with an appropriate mode is not grounds for denial if the substance of the violated right is clear, which correlates with the need to ensure effective judicial protection.
3. **Court’s decision:** The Supreme Court set aside the ruling of the appellate court and upheld the decision of the court of first instance, by which the claims of PE “ZIS” were granted.
