Case No. 522/13795/22 dated 15/01/2025
The cassation court found that the appellate court did not provide proper assessment of the defense’s version regarding the convict’s non-involvement in the crime, did not properly verify the defense’s evidence concerning bodily injuries inflicted on the victim by another person, and also overlooked the key witness’s statement about providing false testimony. The appellate court approached the case formally and did not provide sufficient grounds to refute the defense’s arguments.
Case No. 607/21506/23 dated 16/01/2025
The court took into account that the plaintiff was under investigation and trial for more than 5 years, suffered mental anguish due to disruption of normal life connections, deterioration of relationships with others, and problems in professional activities. The court also considered that the plaintiff’s property was arrested, which limited his rights to dispose of the property. When determining the amount of compensation, the court was guided by the principles of reasonableness and fairness.
Case No. 9/41 dated 17/01/2025
The appellate court refused to open appellate proceedings on the complaint of ISM Management GmbH, as the company missed the appeal deadline without valid reasons. The court established that the complainant did not prove that they learned about the decision on 07/13/2022, and even if this date is taken as a basis – the appeal was filed on 09/02/2022, thus missing the 20-day deadline. The court also took into account that the complainant’s representative was simultaneously the director of the defendant in the case, therefore the company should have known about the court proceedings.
Case No. 345/2391/23 dated 15/01/2025
Subject of dispute – challenging the verdict of the first and appellate courts regarding the conviction of a person for theft of property and document theft during martial law. When making the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the convict’s guilt is confirmed by a set of evidence: victim’s testimony about stolen property, testimonies of persons who saw the accused surrendering stolen items to a pawn shop and selling them, pawn shop video recordings, and an expert appraisal conclusion. The court also took into account that the convict tried to sell the stolen property as quickly as possible, and his version of non-involvement in the crime appeared only during the court hearing. The Supreme Court upheld the first instance verdict and the appellate court ruling, which sentenced the person to 5 years of imprisonment for theft and a fine for document theft.
Case No. 910/8310/24 dated 17/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the applicant did not provide proper evidence to be exempted from court fee payment (did not provide children’s birth certificates) and did not pay the court fee within the established timeframe. The court also noted that the provided medical conclusions, which only indicate the mother of the children, do not confirm the applicant’s right to be exempted from court fee payment. Moreover, the court emphasized that returning the appellate complaint does not deprive the right to reapply after eliminating the deficiencies.
Case No. 903/999/23 dated 16/01/2025
Subject of dispute – recovery of legal assistance costs in the cassation instance in a case of recovering 5.2 million hryvnias. When making the decision, the court was guided by the provisions of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine regarding the distribution of court expenses. Evaluating the claimed legal assistance costs, the court partially recognized them as substantiated and subject to reimbursement.When applying the principle of reasonableness in determining the amount of compensation. Based on the review results, the court partially granted the application and ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff 10,000 UAH for legal assistance.
Case No. 909/66/24 dated 15/01/2025
The courts of first and appellate instances refused to satisfy the claim, motivating this by the fact that the supply contract’s validity period expired on 30.11.2020, and the disputed supply was made on 20.02.2023. At the same time, the courts did not properly investigate the evidence of actual goods movement between the parties and did not establish whether the defendant had a monetary obligation to pay for the actually received goods.
Case No. 926/5429-б/23 dated 14/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the 1,095-day statute of limitations provided by the Tax Code of Ukraine had expired for the disputed tax obligations. Amendments to the legislation on suspending the statute of limitations during quarantine and martial law are not applicable, as they were introduced after the expiration of the statute of limitations for these obligations. The court also took into account that writing off hopeless tax debt is carried out by controlling authorities automatically without the taxpayer’s participation.
Case No. 754/15594/23 dated 15/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is the prosecutor’s appeal against the first instance court and appellate court verdict in criminal proceedings regarding PERSON_7 under Part 2 of Article 125 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (intentional minor bodily injury). The court established the existence of unequal application of legal norms in similar legal relations, which requires the formation of a unified legal position. Therefore, the panel of judges decided to transfer the case for consideration by the Joint Chamber of the Cassation Criminal Court, which has the authority to deviate from previous legal positions and form new practice. The Supreme Court decided to transfer the criminal proceedings for consideration by the Joint Chamber of the Cassation Criminal Court within the Supreme Court.
Case No. 688/455/22 dated 15/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is appealing the verdict in a criminal case regarding the commission of intentional murder under aggravating circumstances and robbery. The cassation instance court reviewed the cassation complaints of the defender and the convicted person against the appellate court’s decision. Since this is only the operative part, the court does not provide the reasons for its decision, but from the crime qualification (paragraphs 6, 12 of Part 2 of Article 115 and Part 4 of Article 187 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), it can be concluded that these are particularly serious crimes – murder for mercenary motives, committed by prior conspiracy by a group of persons, combined with a robbery attack. The Supreme Court left the appellate court’s ruling unchanged and refused to satisfy the cassation complaints of the defender and the convicted person.
Case No. 569/9419/17 dated 15/01/2025
The cassation instance court established that the lower courts correctly qualified the defendant’s actions for resisting a police officer (Part 2 of Article 342 of the Criminal Code), as he threatened with a weapon and fired it during a lawful search. However, the courts’ conclusions about intentionally causing bodily injuries to a police officer (Part 2 of Article 345 of the Criminal Code) are premature, as the presence of intent and causal relationship between the defendant’s actions and the victim’s injuries were not properly investigated.
Case No. 132/926/16-ц dated 10/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that returning an executive sheet under the condition of an existing non-cancelled executor’s ruling on the termination of executionRegarding the proceedings and the presence of a court ruling on the restoration of the time limit for presenting an enforcement sheet for execution is a violation of the right to judicial protection. The court emphasized that the right to judicial protection is a fundamental constitutional right that cannot be restricted even under martial law or a state of emergency. The application of the norms of the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings” cannot contradict the principle of the rule of law.
Case No. 688/455/22 dated 15/01/2025
The court established that the convicted PERSON_8, together with another person, committed a robbery attack on the victims, during which they intentionally deprived one of them of life for mercenary motives. The intent is indicated by the nature and localization of the blows, the number and severity of bodily injuries, as well as the coordination of the attackers’ actions. The defense’s arguments about the absence of intent to murder and prior conspiracy were deemed unfounded by the court.
Case No. 352/1675/21 dated 17/01/2025
The court in rendering its decision was guided by the fact that: 1) according to the village general plan and urban planning documentation, there was no public road between the disputed land plots; 2) the plaintiff did not prove by proper evidence that a public road was included in the respondent’s land plot; 3) the evidence in the case is contradictory and does not confirm the local self-government body’s violation of land legislation requirements.
Case No. 921/740/21 dated 14/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the appellate court first restored the time limit for appeal and opened appellate proceedings on the complaint of the heir of the debtor’s founder, and then groundlessly closed these proceedings, thereby violating the principle of legal certainty and consistency of court decisions. The court also took into account that the heir of the founder has the right to appeal court decisions in a bankruptcy case from the moment of acquiring corporate rights, even if these decisions were made earlier.
Case No. 753/16762/15-ц dated 15/01/2025
Subject of dispute: recovery of debt under a credit agreement in Swiss francs. The court in rendering its decision was guided by the fact that: 1) the fact of receiving the credit is confirmed by a set of evidence – credit agreement, bank statements, and other documents; 2) the borrower improperly fulfilled obligations to repay the credit, which led to the occurrence of debt; 3) the bank’s increase of the interest rate was lawful, as it occurred before January 9, 2009, and corresponded to the contract terms. The court satisfied the bank’s claim and recovered from the borrower the debt under the credit agreement in the amount of 117,032.62 Swiss francs.
Case No. 335/5605/22 dated 17/01/2025
Subject of dispute – invalidation of the apartment purchase and sale agreement, which was the subject of a mortgage, and application of the consequences of an invalid transaction. The court was guided by the fact that mortgage agreements provided for the possibility of selling the mortgage subject only on the basis of a separate agreement on satisfying the mortgagee’s requirements. Since such a separate agreement was not concluded between the parties, the mortgagee (LLC “K-Collect”) did not have the right to sell the apartment. The court also noted that the 2018 amendments to the mortgage legislation do not cancel the need to comply with the parties’ agreed terms of the mortgage agreement regarding the procedure for foreclosure on the mortgage subject. The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of lower instance courts on invalidating the purchase and sale agreement.Sale of an apartment, concluded between LLC “K-Collect” and LLC “Impressive”.
Case No. 137/1421/23 dated 13/01/2025
Subject of the dispute – challenging the decisions of the first and appellate courts regarding the recovery of moral damages from the driver who caused a traffic accident with the victim. The court was guided by the fact that at the time of the accident, the driver’s civil liability was insured by an insurance company, and therefore, in accordance with the law, the insurance company must compensate for moral damages within the insurance amount. The driver is obligated to compensate for moral damages only in the part that exceeds the insurer’s liability limit. The lower courts incorrectly placed the obligation to compensate for the entire moral damage solely on the driver, without taking into account the role of the insurance company. The Supreme Court canceled the previous courts’ decisions in the part of recovering moral damages and sent the case for a new review in the civil proceedings order.
Case No. 686/18206/21 dated 16/01/2025
Subject of the dispute – the prosecutor’s appeal against the appellate court’s ruling in criminal proceedings against a person accused of violating traffic safety rules. Unfortunately, since this is only the operative part of the resolution, it is impossible to determine the specific arguments that guided the Supreme Court in making the decision. In such a situation, the court only states its decision without providing motives. Based on the results of the review, the Supreme Court partially satisfied the prosecutor’s cassation complaint, canceled the appellate court’s ruling, and sent the case for a new review to the appellate court.
Case No. 904/5963/23 dated 16/01/2025
Subject of the dispute – recognition of the notary’s executive inscription on the return of a car from the lessee to the lessor as not subject to execution. The court in making the decision was guided by the fact that: 1) the lessee’s debt and the fact of termination of the leasing agreement were established in another court case; 2) the lessor provided all necessary documents for making the executive inscription in accordance with the legislation; 3) the absence of the car in the lessee’s possession does not affect the legitimacy of the executive inscription, as the risk of random destruction or damage to the leasing subject is borne by the lessee. The court refused to satisfy the claim to recognize the executive inscription as not subject to execution.
Case No. 902/1581/23 dated 17/01/2025
The court of first instance satisfied the claim, as it established that the defendant, whose generating capacities are located in the temporarily occupied territory of the Kherson region, actually did not supply electricity in April-May 2023, which is confirmed by updated commercial accounting data. At the same time, the plaintiff has already paid for this period, but the defendant refused to return the funds.
Case No. 553/1193/23 dated 16/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the plaintiff did not appear in court hearings again, although he was properly notified of their conduct. At the same time, the court emphasized that for leaving the claim without consideration, the validity of the reasons for non-appearance is not important – the fact of repeated non-appearance of the plaintiff and the absence of a request to consider the case in his absence are important. Such a court position is aimed at disciplining the plaintiff as the initiator of the court proceedings.
Case No. 910/68/24 dated 16/01/2025
The appellate court appointed a forensic computer-technical examination andStopped the proceedings in the case until receiving its results. LLC “Gas Transmission System Operator of Ukraine” appealed this decision, considering it unjustified. However, the Supreme Court pointed out that appointing an expert examination simultaneously with stopping the proceedings is an inseparable procedural action that complies with procedural law norms and does not violate the parties’ rights.
Case No. 904/2592/23 dated 14/01/2025
The court of cassation instance considers that the courts of previous instances correctly established that the disputed premises are auxiliary premises and joint property of the house co-owners. However, the courts did not take into account that the method of protection chosen by the plaintiff (cancellation of the decision only in terms of determining the balance holder) is ineffective, as it does not terminate the right of communal ownership of the disputed property and does not restore the violated rights of co-owners.
Case No. 910/7625/23 dated 17/01/2025
Subject of dispute – invalidation of the act of non-signing of the contract and recovery of funds by LLC ‘Ukrainian Image’ against the Regional Office of the State Property Fund in Kyiv. The court did not provide detailed motives for its decision in the operative part but partially satisfied the cassation appeal of the State Property Fund, canceling the appellate court’s resolution and keeping the first instance court’s decision in force. The court also recovered court fees from LLC ‘Ukrainian Image’ for filing a cassation appeal in the amount of over 200,000 hryvnias. The Supreme Court made a decision in favor of the Regional Office of the State Property Fund, partially satisfying its cassation appeal.
Case No. 569/9419/17 dated 15/01/2025
The court does not disclose detailed argumentation in the operative part of the resolution, noting only that the full text of the decision will be announced later. However, based on the adopted decision, the panel of judges established significant violations in the consideration of the case by the appellate court, which require a new review of the case.
Case No. 916/1137/24 dated 16/01/2025
When making the decision, the court was guided by the following: 1) price is an essential condition of the procurement contract and cannot be increased by more than 10% of the initial price; 2) disputed additional agreements led to a price increase of 58%, which contradicts the law; 3) reduction of procurement volumes could only affect the quantity of goods, but not change its unit price.
Case No. 903/999/23 dated 16/01/2025
When making the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the amount of legal assistance expenses must correspond to the criteria of reality and reasonableness. It was taken into account that the plaintiff’s legal position was consistent, the lawyer was already familiar with the case from previous instances, and the response to the cassation appeal duplicated previous documents. The court also noted that the conditions for paying the lawyer’s bonus were not defined in the contract.
Case No. 924/492/24 dated 16/01/2025
Subject of dispute – challenging the decision of the territorial office of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine by ‘Systembud LTD’ company. Unfortunately, from the provided text, it is impossible to determine the specific arguments of the court, as only the introductory and operative parts of the decision are presented without the motivational part, where legal positions and court reasoning are usually set out. The Supreme Court refused to satisfy the cassation appeal of LLC ‘Systembud LTD’ and left the appellate court’s decision unchanged.Case No. 910/1911/24 dated 16/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the defendant received double payment from the plaintiff (voluntary and compulsory) for the same court decision. The defendant’s attempt to offset these funds against other claims was deemed unlawful, as such claims were disputed and not confirmed by a court decision. An important argument was that for offsetting counterclaims, they must be undisputed.
Case No. 904/4463/23 dated 17/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that under Law No. 1639-IX, only debt arising in the period from 01/01/2020 to 28/02/2022 is subject to settlement. In this case, this is only 2.32 UAH of debt for January 2022. The rest of the debt arose outside this period and therefore is not subject to settlement under this law. The private executor lawfully did not suspend the collection of the entire amount, but only the part that falls under the law.
Case No. 910/3627/16 dated 13/01/2025
The appellate court satisfied the application for replacement of the plaintiff, as a contract of assignment of claim was concluded between PJSC “Zlatobank” and LLC “FC “U-Base””. However, the court did not consider the respondent’s (SE “Sentex”) motion to request original documents, thereby violating the principle of procedural equality of parties and the right to judicial protection.
Case No. 163/1065/15-p dated 17/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is the review of administrative liability orders against PERSON_1 in connection with the ECtHR decision in the case “Sapitash and Others v. Ukraine”. The court established that the application for review of court decisions was filed properly and meets all formal requirements of the CAO. To consider the case on the merits, it is necessary to obtain an official translation of the ECtHR decision establishing Ukraine’s violation of international obligations in considering the applicant’s case. The Judge of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court decided to request from the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine a copy of the ECtHR decision in the case “Sapitash and Others v. Ukraine” along with an authentic translation.
Case No. 136/921/19 dated 16/01/2025
The court in making its decision was guided by the fact that the plaintiff chose an improper method of protecting their right – a claim for return of a land plot. Such a claim can only be derivative of the main claim to declare the lease right absent. Since the plaintiff did not make a claim to declare the lease right absent, there are no grounds to satisfy the derivative claim for plot return.
Case No. 610/3780/24 dated 13/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is the defender’s motion to transfer criminal proceedings against the accused of theft and official forgery from one court to another. The court did not provide detailed arguments in the operative part of the decision, as this is only a brief extract from the full text of the ruling. However, from the available text, it is clear that the issue was considered in accordance with Articles 32 and 34 of the CPC of Ukraine, which regulate territorial jurisdiction and the procedure for transferring cases from one court to another. The Supreme Court denied the defender’s motion to change the territorial jurisdiction of criminal proceedings.
Case No. 923/69/22 dated 16/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is the recovery of legal aid costs of an attorney in the amount of 33,000 UAH from the Infrastructure Department of the Kherson Regional State Administration in favor of PJSC “Ukratomenergobudh”.In making the decision, the court was guided by the following: 1) the Company properly confirmed the amount of legal expenses with documents (contract, acts, annotated report); 2) the Department did not file a motion to reduce the amount of expenses and did not prove their disproportionality; 3) the claimed amount of expenses is proportionate to the complexity of the case and the volume of services provided. The Supreme Court left unchanged the additional resolution of the appellate court on recovering 33,000 UAH of legal assistance expenses, as it was adopted in compliance with the procedural law norms.
Case No. 902/924/23 dated 14/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the religious organization did not introduce changes to its official name within the established timeframe and did not submit the corresponding changes to the statute for state registration, as required by law. As a result, the statute lost its validity in terms of the organization’s name, and it can no longer be considered a religious organization with a statute registered in the prescribed manner. Accordingly, it lost the right to permanent use of the land plot, which is granted only to religious organizations with a properly registered statute.
Case No. 925/958/22 dated 17/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that since the debtor (PrJSC “Umangas”) is included in the register of enterprises participating in the debt settlement procedure for natural gas market entities, enforcement actions must be suspended until the debtor is removed from this register. The private executor acted lawfully when suspending the enforcement proceedings and did not resume them, as the debtor is still in the register.
Case No. 914/1966/23 dated 16/01/2025
When making the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the natural gas transportation agreement must be concluded in accordance with the Standard Contract approved by NKREКP. The only basis for amending such a contract is the introduction and approval of changes to the Standard Contract by the Regulator. The parties cannot deviate from the content of the Standard Contract but may only specify its terms. The changes proposed by JSC “Lvivgas” contradicted the terms of the Standard Contract.
Case No. 401/268/21 dated 13/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is appealing the appellate court’s verdict regarding the conviction of a person for intentional murder and robbery. When making the decision, the court was guided by the following: 1) numerous bodily injuries inflicted on the victim, which resulted in his death, were caused by the convicted person, as confirmed by witness testimonies and forensic medical examination; 2) traces of the victim’s blood were found on the convicted person’s clothing; 3) the convicted person’s behavior after committing the crime (fleeing the scene, refusing to help transfer the victim to an ambulance) also indicates their guilt. The Supreme Court left unchanged the appellate court’s verdict, which sentenced the person to 8 years and 6 months of imprisonment for intentional murder and robbery.
Case No. 588/549/16-к dated 16/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is cassation appeal of lower instance court decisions in criminal proceedings against PERSON_6, accused of committing a criminal offense under Part 2 of Article 125 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (intentional minor bodily injury). Since this is only the operative part of the ruling, the court does not provide arguments on the merits of the case. However, from a procedural point of view, the court was guided by the provisions of Part 2 of Article 376 and Part 4 of Article 441 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, which allow limiting oneself to drawing up the operative part if the full decision requires significant time to prepare. The Supreme Court adopted…
