Good day! Here is a detailed analysis of the court decision, as you requested.
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the orders of the State Geocadastre regarding the transfer of land plots for lease as illegal and the recognition of the lease agreements for these plots as invalid.
2. The courts of previous instances satisfied the prosecutor’s claim, considering that at the time of receiving the disputed land plots for lease, the defendant was already the founder of a farm, which, in their opinion, violates the requirements of land legislation. The Supreme Court did not agree with this approach, indicating that the dispute concerns the use of land of the farm, and therefore, in accordance with the law and the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, such disputes are subject to consideration in the order of commercial (economic) court procedure, regardless of the prior receipt of land by an individual or the creation of a farm by him/her. Thus, the courts of general jurisdiction did not have the right to consider this case.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous courts and closed the proceedings in the case, clarifying that the dispute is subject to consideration in a commercial (economic) court.
