Case No. 915/317/21 dated 15/01/2025
The court, when rendering its decision, was guided by the fact that the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine was aware of the legislative violations in the contract conclusion since 2016, as it had all possibilities to verify its legality through the subordinate Main Control and Audit Inspection. The court also noted that this dispute is not a negatory claim, as it arose from contractual relations, and therefore is subject to the statute of limitations.
Case No. 757/34859/21 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that since the cassation court satisfied PrivatBank’s complaint and rejected the original claim, all court expenses should be borne by the plaintiff. In this regard, the court took into account that the bank paid court fees for filing an appellate complaint (9,848.09 UAH) and a cassation complaint (13,130.78 UAH), which are to be reimbursed by the plaintiff in accordance with the principle of proportional distribution of court expenses.
Case No. 447/1370/22 dated 25/09/2024
The court was guided by the fact that although the defendant registered as a private entrepreneur, the financial assistance agreement was concluded with him as an individual – a participant in the pilot project for involving members of low-income families. Therefore, this contract cannot be considered a commercial one, despite the funds being provided for entrepreneurial activities. The court also took into account that the contract party was an employment center as a social protection body, not as a business entity.
Case No. 718/435/24 dated 13/01/2025
The court established that the plaintiff and the bank had concluded bank deposit agreements under which the plaintiff made deposits. The bank did not return part of the deposit amounting to 700,000 UAH. The fact that the branch manager who signed the contracts committed a criminal offense does not affect the validity of the contractual relations between the bank and the depositor. Non-compliance with internal procedures by bank employees cannot be grounds for refusing to return the deposit.
Case No. 920/604/23(920/1130/23) dated 16/01/2025
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the debtor taking on the obligations of a guarantor did not automatically mean the emergence of property obligations, and the connection between the debtor and the main borrower indicates the reality and business purpose of the disputed transactions. The court also noted that at the time of concluding additional agreements, the debtor was conducting economic activities, and there is no evidence of its insolvency.
Case No. 926/446/24 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the lease agreement expired on 30.11.2021 due to the approval of the Regulation on Communal Property Lease, that is, before the introduction of martial law in Ukraine. The court also took into account that the tenant’s application for contract extension did not meet the requirements of legislation regarding state and communal property lease.
Case No. 522/1471/17 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the executive service’s inaction regarding non-execution of the court ruling cannot be challenged within the enforcement proceedings for alimony collection, as the law provides a different procedure for executing such a ruling – by opening a separate enforcement proceeding.The court took into account that the debtor has child support arrears in the amount of 87,073 UAH and has not been fulfilling the decision to pay them for several years.
Case No. 760/13472/22 dated 15/01/2025
The appellate court, while canceling the first instance court’s decision, proceeded from the fact that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient evidence that the defendant has not been residing in the disputed apartment without valid reasons for more than six months. The court took into account that the defendant is temporarily residing in Germany since February 2022 as a refugee, has not lost interest in the disputed apartment, paid utility services, and intends to exercise the right to privatization.
Case No. 293/1491/23 dated 15/01/2025
The court denied the claim because the plaintiff did not prove that the parties’ will was aimed at establishing relations other than those provided by the donation agreement. The court noted that to recognize the transaction as sham, it is necessary to provide evidence that both parties to the agreement acted consciously to achieve other legal consequences and conceal the true will of the participants. Such evidence was not provided by the plaintiff.
Case No. 522/13655/20 dated 15/01/2025
The court noted that the heir’s lack of a certificate of inheritance cannot be grounds for refusing the creditor’s claims. Moreover, since the heir’s liability is limited to the value of inherited property, the heir bears the burden of proving the scope and value of the inherited property if they object to the creditor’s claims. The previous instance courts incorrectly applied the law, not taking into account that the heir timely accepted the inheritance, which belongs to them from the moment of its opening.
Case No. 638/3799/23 dated 15/01/2025
The court established that the dismissal was lawful because: 1) the reorganization of the institution indeed took place based on the Cabinet of Ministers’ order; 2) another position was offered to the employee (0.5 professor’s rate), which he refused; 3) the employer followed the procedure of contacting the trade union for consent to dismissal; 4) the employee actually stopped performing his duties after being warned about dismissal.
Case No. 760/2096/22 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that: 1) there are no legal grounds for taking the child away from the father, as there was no previous court decision on determining the child’s place of residence; 2) the appellate court incorrectly applied the norm about unauthorized change of the child’s place of residence; 3) when determining the child’s place of residence, all circumstances of the case were not properly investigated, including the opinion of the guardianship authority and psychological diagnostics, which testified in favor of the child living with the father.
Case No. 511/967/24 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the plaintiff filed an unfounded claim, as the subject of the dispute did not exist at the time of filing the claim. According to Part 5 of Article 142 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, if the proceedings are closed, the defendant has the right to compensation for expenses due to the plaintiff’s unfounded actions. The court found that the defendant’s legal assistance expenses of 61,500 UAH are justified and confirmed by appropriate evidence.
Case No. 729/371/22 dated 15/01/2025
The appellate court denied recovery of average earnings…Considering that the claim should have been filed against the Bobrovytsia Lyceum as the employer, and not against the Education Department. However, the Supreme Court did not agree with this, as the Education Department had concluded the employment contract with the director, paid her salary and bonus payments, thus effectively acting as the employer. The court also took into account that the financing of educational institutions is carried out from state and local budgets through the relevant education management bodies.
[Case No. 760/17849/20 dated 15/01/2025]
Subject of the dispute – cancellation of property registration for groups of premises in a dormitory that was illegally divided into residential and non-residential premises. The court was guided by the fact that: 1) the transfer of residential premises to non-residential was carried out without obtaining the necessary permission from the Kyiv City State Administration’s Urban Planning Department; 2) the division of the dormitory and change of premises’ purpose violates the plaintiff’s housing rights, who has lived there for a long time; 3) such actions make it impossible for the plaintiff to exercise the right to privatize the occupied residential premises. The Supreme Court upheld the appellate court’s decision to cancel the property registration for the divided groups of dormitory premises.
[Case No. 200/4670/13-ц dated 15/01/2025]
The court of cassation instance found that the appellate court incorrectly applied the old procedural norms regarding appeal terms (10 days instead of 30 days). The Supreme Court emphasized that the appeal procedure is determined by the procedural rules in effect at the time of filing the appeal, not at the time of the challenged decision. The court also noted that the right to appeal the заочне (in absentia) decision arose after the ruling on its review in 2024, therefore, the current procedural norms should be applied.
[Case No. 127/2115/13-ц dated 14/01/2025]
The court established that the term for presenting the executive document for execution had not expired, as it was interrupted by the return of the executive sheet in 2019 due to the moratorium on foreclosure of mortgage property. Additionally, this term was suspended due to the introduction of martial law in Ukraine. The court also took into account that proper legal succession of claim rights occurred from the original creditor to the applicant through the conclusion of relevant agreements.
[Case No. 739/717/24 dated 15/01/2025]
The court was guided by the fact that the parents of the deceased serviceman objected to establishing their son’s paternity regarding the applicant’s children. Since parents can also claim pension due to loss of breadwinner, a dispute over rights arose that cannot be considered in separate proceedings. The court also took into account that the presence of objections from interested parties indicates the absence of indisputability of the paternity fact.
[Case No. 909/1001/23 dated 15/01/2025]
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the agreement between the parties is, by its legal nature, a lease agreement. According to legislation on the specifics of property lease during martial law, such agreements are automatically extended for the period of martial law and 4 months after its termination. Since no circumstances were established that would impede the continuation of the agreement, the plaintiff’s claims for vacating the sites are unfounded.
[Case No. 910/12128/23 dated 17/01/2025]
Subject of the dispute – recovery from the Main…Regarding the recovery of mistakenly paid funds in the amount of 34,000 UAH from the local treasury management office, including inflation losses and 3% per annum. The court in making its decision was guided by the following: 1) previous instance courts incorrectly identified the defendant, as the recovery should have been made from the State Budget of Ukraine, not from the treasury body; 2) courts did not clarify the need to involve the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine as a party to the case, although this body issued the fine; 3) the issue of identifying the payment as payment for a specific fine and the significance of the plaintiff not reporting voluntary payment was not investigated. The Supreme Court canceled the decisions of previous instance courts and sent the case for a new review to the court of first instance to eliminate the identified violations.
Case No. 922/1181/24 dated 14/01/2025
The court established that after the Supreme Court canceled previous court decisions and sent the case for a new review, the period until the case is accepted by the court of first instance is not considered a period of actual case consideration. Therefore, for this period (31 days), it is legitimate to accrue a penalty of 1.5% of the fine amount for each day. The court also noted that there is consistent judicial practice regarding such interpretation of legal norms, from which lower instance courts are not allowed to deviate.
Case No. 911/1795/22 dated 20/01/2025
The court was guided by the following: 1) a contract of assignment of claim was concluded between the original creditor and the new creditor, which is valid and not declared invalid; 2) replacement of the creditor in the obligation is allowed throughout the entire existence of the obligation, including the stage of executing a court decision; 3) the existence of a court decision does not terminate the parties’ obligatory legal relations and does not limit their right to assign the claim.
Case No. 205/4972/23 dated 15/01/2025
The cassation instance court pointed out that the appellate court did not provide proper assessment of the available evidence (archive reference, witness testimonies, photographs), did not verify the sufficiency of evidence confirming the applicant’s origin from the deceased, the fact of paternity recognition during his lifetime, joint residence, and household management. The circle of all heirs of the deceased was also not established. The court emphasized that current legislation does not contain an exhaustive list of means of proving family relationships.
Case No. 217/116/22 dated 15/01/2025
The court in making its decision was guided by the fact that the employer did not prove the objective necessity of suspending the employee, as it did not substantiate that the employee created real threats of infection spread while performing duties. The court noted that to determine the necessity of mandatory vaccination, it is necessary to consider not only formal belonging to the list of professions but also assess actual risks, including the number of social contacts, working conditions, and the possibility of remote work. Suspension of the employee solely based on working at Ukrzaliznytsia without considering the specifics of his position was recognized as a disproportionate interference with the right to work.
Case No. 760/16255/23 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that deprivation of parental rights is an extreme measure of influence. Although the mother indeed did not communicate with her son since 2014, she now acknowledges her guilt, attempts to restore contact with the child, and is ready to fulfill parental responsibilities. At the same time, there is no evidence that…Communication with the mother may harm the child. The court also took into account that the guardianship authorities did not provide proper support in establishing relations between the mother and son.
Case No. 926/5558/23 dated 15/01/2025
The subject of the dispute concerns the invalidation of a legal transaction regarding the transfer of immovable property from LLC “Chernivtsi Development” to an individual PERSON_1, which was carried out to avoid debt collection. The court of cassation instance established that this dispute is not subject to consideration in commercial courts because: 1) the plaintiff has a civil interest in the debtor’s property as an executor in enforcement proceedings, not within corporate relations; 2) the property was transferred to an individual; 3) the legal relations do not have signs of economic and legal relations. The court took into account the established practice of the Supreme Court, according to which such disputes should be considered in the order of civil proceedings. The Supreme Court canceled the decisions of the previous instances and closed the proceedings in the case, explaining to the plaintiff the right to apply to a court of civil jurisdiction.
Case No. 916/2714/23 dated 14/01/2025
Subject of the dispute: invalidation of additional agreements to the electricity supply contract and return of unjustly paid funds. The main arguments of the court: 1) The prosecutor had the right to file a lawsuit in the interests of the state, since the Izmail Water Management Department, being a budget funds manager, did not take measures to protect state interests; 2) When concluding additional agreements, the parties violated restrictions on the possibility of increasing the price by no more than 10% of the original contract price – in fact, the price was increased by 104%; 3) The defendant did not prove the existence of objective reasons for such a significant price increase and did not substantiate the impossibility of performing the contract at the original price. Court decision: Additional agreements to the electricity supply contract were declared invalid, and the supplier was ordered to pay 71,910.09 UAH of unjustly paid funds to the Izmail Management.
Case No. 916/1507/21 dated 16/01/2025
The appellate court concluded that the case should be considered on the merits, as the subject of the dispute existed both at the time of the executor’s submission and continues to exist. The fact that the issue of the disputed immovable property is the subject of consideration in another civil case cannot indicate the absence of the subject of the dispute. Moreover, disputes in which the debtor in a bankruptcy case is a party should be considered by a commercial court.
Case No. 127/5134/17 dated 15/01/2025
The court established that due to the systematic violation of the payment schedule by the borrower, the loan repayment term changed from 2022 to 2012 according to the contract terms. Since the bank filed a lawsuit only in 2017, i.e., after the expiration of the 3-year statute of limitations, and the defendant claimed the application of the statute of limitations – the claim should be denied. The courts of first and appellate instances incorrectly applied substantive law, not taking into account the statute of limitations issue.
Case No. 390/137/24 dated 15/01/2025
The court established that the father-in-law systematically committed psychological violence due to a property dispute over a house – arranging quarrels, threatening, insulting the daughter-in-law and son, fighting with the son in the presence of children, coming with threats to the daughter-in-law’s workplace. The court took into account that after the issuance of an urgent prohibitory injunction, the father-in-law continued aggressive behavior.
