1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the actions of a private enforcement officer regarding the initiation of enforcement proceedings for the compulsory recovery of funds from JSC “Kharkivgaz” in favor of LLC “Gas Transmission System Operator of Ukraine”.
2. The court of cassation upheld the decision of the lower courts, leaving the cassation appeal of JSC “Kharkivgaz” unsatisfied. The court noted that the transfer of corporate rights to the management of ARMA does not change the form of ownership, and therefore, the restrictions established by paragraph 2 of part 2 of Article 5 of the Law “On Enforcement Proceedings” regarding legal entities, the state share in the authorized capital of which exceeds 25%, do not apply in this case. In addition, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of the actions of the private enforcement officer regarding the initiation of enforcement proceedings at the location of the debtor’s property, namely at the location of the bank accounts of JSC “Kharkivgaz” in Kyiv, since the creditor provided relevant evidence. The court also noted that it departed from the previous conclusion regarding the identity of asset management and ownership, stated in the постанові (ruling) of the Supreme Court of December 19, 2024, in case No. 903/62/23, taking into account the постанову (ruling) of the joint chamber of the Commercial Cassation Court of May 16, 2025, in case No. 903/421/24.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of JSC “Kharkivgaz”, and the decisions of the lower courts remained unchanged.
