Here is the translation:
1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging the refusal of the Urban Planning and Architecture Department to extend the temporary structure placement passport for entrepreneurial activity.
2. Main Court Arguments:
– The temporary structure placement passport is not a permit-type document, therefore the Cabinet of Ministers Resolution #314 on automatic document extension during martial law does not apply to it.
– The placement passport’s validity period had already expired at the time of the plaintiff’s appeal (11.10.2022), therefore the respondent lawfully refused extension.
– Previous instance courts incorrectly qualified the placement passport as a permit document.
3. Court Decision: Previous instance decisions were cancelled and the individual entrepreneur’s claim for passport extension was denied.
Note: The Supreme Court deviated from previous judicial practice regarding the interpretation of the concept of “permit-type document”.
