Subject of the Dispute: Dismantling of a Fence and Gates on the Plaintiff’s Land Plot without Establishing a Land Easement or Purchasing the Land Plot.
Main Arguments of the Court:
1. The Appellate Court incorrectly recognized the actions of local authorities as lawful, as it did not investigate the possibility of establishing a land easement.
2. There is no evidence that the land plot was seized for public needs and compensated to the owner.
3. The dismantling of the fence effectively deprived the plaintiff of property ownership without following the legally established procedure.
Court Decision: Revoke the appellate court’s ruling and refer the case for a new hearing to fully investigate the circumstances of the case.
Note: The Supreme Court deviated from previous practice regarding the assessment of the legitimacy of property dismantling by local self-government bodies.
