Case No. 947/26793/21 dated May 21, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of ownership of a part of the hereditary property (house) in the order of inheritance by will.
2. The court of cassation established that the appellate court violated the norms of procedural law, failing to take into account that PERSON_4, who filed the appeal, was not actually a party to the case, since the court of first instance refused her entry into the case as a third party with independent claims, and she did not appeal this ruling. The appellate court also did not take into account the prejudicial circumstances established in other court cases involving PERSON_4, which refute her claims regarding the rights to the disputed household. In addition, the appellate court did not determine exactly which rights and interests of PERSON_4 were violated by the decision of the court of first instance. Given these violations, the court of cassation concluded that the appellate court groundlessly overturned the decision of the court of first instance, and this is the basis for overturning the appellate court’s ruling.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and sent the case for a new trial to the court of appeal.
Case No. 139/241/23 dated May 22, 2025
Of course, here is a detailed analysis of the court decision, as you requested:
1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of land plots from someone else’s illegal possession in favor of the state.
2. The court justified its decision by the fact that the land plots left the ownership of the state against its will, since the decisions on their transfer to private ownership were forged, and the defendant did not show due diligence when concluding purchase and sale agreements. The court also took into account that at the time of registration of ownership by the primary acquirers, the lands were state-owned and located outside the settlement, therefore, the local council did not have the authority to transfer them. The court noted that the interests of the state in returning illegally alienated land outweigh the interests of a bona fide purchaser, especially considering the latter’s ability to recover damages from the guilty parties. In addition, the court emphasized the importance of adhering to a “fair balance” between the interests of the state and the rights of the purchaser, but in this case, it decided that the recovery of property is not an excessive burden for the defendant. The court also took into account that the defendant may demand compensation for damages from previous owners.
3. The court decided to leave the cassation appeal of PERSON_1 without satisfaction, and the decisions of the courts of previous instances – without changes, confirming the recovery of land plots in favor of the state.
Case No. 344/12588/22 dated May 05, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition as illegal of the order to dismiss the director of the art school, reinstatement to work.
and recovery of wages for the period of forced absence and moral damages.
3. The court of cassation overturned the decision of the court of appeal, upholding the decision of the court of first instance, based on the fact that Kosiv School of Arts is an institution in the field of culture, and therefore, the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Regarding the Introduction of Contractual Form of Work in the Field of Culture and Competitive Procedure for the Appointment of Heads of State and Communal Cultural Institutions” applies to the disputed legal relations, which provides for the possibility of termination of an indefinite employment contract with the head of a cultural institution in connection with the introduction of a contractual form of work. The court noted that the court of appeal mistakenly applied the rules of law, believing that since the school is an extracurricular educational institution in the field of culture, the provisions on the competition for the position of head do not apply. Also, the court of cassation departed from the previous conclusion of the Supreme Court in case No. 344/11960/22, stating that the provisions on the contractual form of work also apply to the heads of music schools and art schools.
4. The court overturned the decision of the court of appeal and upheld the decision of the court of first instance to dismiss the claim.
Case No. 201/1515/22 dated 05/22/2025
5. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of an apartment from illegal possession and the eviction of residents.
6. The court partially satisfied the claim, reclaiming the apartment in favor of the city council, as it established that the apartment was disposed of from communal ownership illegally, without the will of the owner, and was not privatized. The court took into account that the sale and purchase agreement, on the basis of which the apartment passed into the ownership of the defendant, was based on an invalid document. At the same time, the court recognized the defendant as a bona fide acquirer, but emphasized that this does not prevent the recovery of property, since the owner has the right to protect his property. The court also noted that the defendant has the right to compensation for damages from the seller. The court took into account the criteria of proportionality of interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property, provided for in Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and concluded that the recovery of property is proportional, since it complies with the provisions of national legislation and the legitimate aim of protecting property rights.
7. The court decided to recover the apartment from the illegal possession of PERSON_1 in favor of the territorial community of the city of Dnipro.
Case No. 523/7802/20 dated 05/21/2025
8. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of property (land plots) from someone else’s illegal possession and recognition of ownership of real estate in the order of inheritance by law.
9. The court of cassation, overturning the decision of the court of appeal, was guided
argued with the following arguments: the appellate court did not take into account that a bona fide person who acquires real estate has the right to rely on information about the real rights of other persons contained in the State Register of Real Property Rights; the appellate court did not take into account that the possibility of claiming property depends on the legal connection between the plaintiff and the disputed property, the expression of will regarding the disposal of the property, the good faith of the acquirer, and the nature of the acquisition of the property; the appellate court did not conclude on the bad faith behavior of the acquirer regarding the seizure of the disputed real estate; the appellate court did not take into account that a special rule of paragraph 1 of part one of Article 2 of the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Real Property Rights and Their Encumbrances” should be applied to determine the good faith of the acquirer. The court of cassation emphasized the need to assess the good faith behavior of the registered owner of real estate and to take into account that interference with the right to peaceful enjoyment of property must be lawful and ensure a fair balance between the interests of society and the rights of a particular person.
2. The Supreme Court reversed the appellate court’s decision in the part of satisfying the claims for the recovery of land plots and remanded the case in this part for a new trial to the court of appellate instance, and also reversed the appellate court’s decision to change the reasoning part of the decision of the court of first instance.
Case No. 534/2080/23 dated 05/21/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is an appeal against the appellate court’s ruling on the cancellation of the security of the claim in the case of the release of property from arrest.
2. The appellate court overturned the ruling on the security of the claim, since the plaintiff did not prove the fact of the sale of property by the state executor and a real threat of non-execution of the court decision, believing that sending a decision on arrest does not indicate the beginning of the sale of property. The Supreme Court disagreed with such motives, indicating that the appellate court incorrectly applied the norms of the Civil Procedure Code, which regulate the security of the claim by suspending the sale of seized property, since such security is possible if a claim is filed to recognize ownership of this property and to remove the arrest from it. However, since the plaintiff did not claim the recognition of ownership of the disputed property, the Supreme Court recognized the appellate court’s conclusion on the refusal to satisfy the application for securing the claim as justified.
3. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the cassation appeal, changing the reasoning part of the appellate court’s decision, but left unchanged the decision to refuse to satisfy the application for securing the claim.
Case No. 465/6173/22 dated 05/21/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is compensation for moral and material damage caused as a result of
death of the plaintiffs’ son in a traffic accident caused by the fault of a driver who was in labor relations with the defendant, a private entrepreneur (FOP).
2. The court of cassation upheld the decisions of the previous instances, which partially satisfied the claim for compensation for moral and material damage caused by a fatal traffic accident, since the driver at fault for the accident was in labor relations with the FOP, who is the owner of a source of increased danger, and the employer is responsible for the damage caused by his employee while performing his labor duties. The court took into account the depth of the parents’ emotional suffering from the loss of their son, as well as the costs of manufacturing a monument, which are subject to reimbursement based on the principles of reasonableness, proportionality, and fairness. The court noted that the amount of compensation for moral damages in the amount of UAH 500,000 to each parent is not excessive or unreasonable, considering the circumstances of the case and established judicial practice. Also, the court of cassation emphasized that establishing the circumstances of the case and evaluating the evidence is the prerogative of the courts of first and appellate instances, and it has no authority to interfere in this evaluation.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the previous instances.
Case No. 305/1233/21 dated May 28, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery from an individual of debt under a loan agreement, calculated taking into account inflation and three percent per annum based on Part 2 of Article 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine.
2. The Supreme Court considered the cassation appeals of a person who did not participate in the case against two rulings of the appellate court: the first refusing to open appellate proceedings on the appellate court’s постанову (ruling), and the second refusing to open appellate proceedings on the decision of the court of first instance. Regarding the first ruling, the Supreme Court agreed with the appellate court that appealing the appellate court’s ruling by a person who did not participate in the case is not provided for by procedural law. Regarding the second ruling, the Supreme Court noted that the appellate court mistakenly applied the rule on refusing to open proceedings due to failure to remedy the defects of the appeal, since this rule applies only to participants in the case. The Supreme Court indicated that the appellate court should have opened the proceedings and then decided whether the court of first instance had resolved the issue of the rights and interests of this person.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling refusing to open appellate proceedings on the complaint of a person who did not participate in the case, against the decision of the court of first instance, and upheld the ruling refusing to open appellate proceedings on the appellate court’s ruling.
Case No. 529/235/22 dated May 29, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the illegality of an act.
Concerning the invalid actions of a private notary regarding the registration of ownership of land plots by LLC “FC Horizon.”
3. The court of cassation agreed with the decision of the appellate court, which overturned the decision of the court of first instance, reasoning that the plaintiff had chosen an ineffective method of protecting the violated rights, since challenging only the actions of the notary without challenging the consequences of the registration actions would not lead to the restoration of the plaintiff’s ownership of the disputed property. The court noted that the proper method of protection in this case would be to challenge the decision on extrajudicial foreclosure on the subject of the mortgage, if the property had not yet been alienated by the mortgagee. The court also took into account that the appellate court reasonably reduced the amount of expenses for professional legal assistance, considering the заявлену суму excessive and disproportionate to the complexity of the case and the amount of services provided. The court of cassation emphasized that establishing the circumstances of the case and evaluating evidence is the prerogative of the courts of first and appellate instances, and it does not have the authority to interfere in the evaluation of evidence, unless there were violations of the procedure for their submission and receipt.
4. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decision of the appellate court.
Case No. 462/9315/13-ц dated May 29, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the inaction of the state enforcement service regarding the failure to send the claimant a decision to refuse the opening of enforcement proceedings and the obligation to perform certain actions.
2. The court refused to satisfy the complaint, as it found that the bank was aware of the opening of enforcement proceedings and the cancellation of the decision to open them, but did not inquire about the progress of the enforcement proceedings for a long time. The court noted that the party to the enforcement proceedings is obliged to monitor the progress of their case and use procedural rights in good faith. The court also took into account that the bank did not provide evidence of a violation of its rights by the state executor at the time of the enforcement actions. The court referred to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which emphasizes the obligation of a party to inquire about the proceedings in their case at a reasonable interval of time. The court also took into account the provisions of the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings,” according to which enforcement proceedings are the final stage of judicial proceedings, which imposes on the bank the obligation to actively inquire about its progress.
3. The court of cassation dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances.
Case No. 578/970/22 dated May 28, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of debt under a revolving financial assistance agreement.
2. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the courts of previous instances that the defendant did not provideand that there was no proper evidence of the funds being returned to the plaintiff, and that her behavior was contradictory, which indicates bad faith. The court noted that the receipt to the cash receipt order is not proper evidence of the return of funds, as the payment should have been made through a bank, not in cash, given the amount. Also, the receipt was not signed by an authorized person. The court emphasized that establishing the circumstances of the case and assessing evidence is the prerogative of the courts of first and appellate instances, and that the cassation court is a court of law, not of fact. The court also took into account that the defendant repeatedly changed her position regarding the circumstances of the case, which also indicates her bad faith.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.
**Case No. 172/747/24 dated 05/29/2025**
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of ownership of an apartment, which, according to the plaintiffs, was privatized, but the title documents for which were lost due to hostilities.
2. The court dismissed the claim because the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient evidence to prove their ownership of the disputed apartment. The court noted that the provided copies of privatization property certificates do not contain information about the exchange for a share of state property, in particular, the housing stock, and therefore cannot be irrefutable evidence of ownership. The court also took into account that the plaintiffs did not provide evidence of applying to the relevant authorities for duplicates of title documents and the refusal to issue them. The court emphasized that each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers, and that proof cannot be based on assumptions. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the lower courts, emphasizing that privatization certificates themselves do not confirm ownership of a specific apartment without reflecting the corresponding exchange transaction.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.
**Case No. 201/12904/23 dated 05/29/2025**
1. The subject of the dispute is the requirement of “Novobud Servis” LLC to oblige PERSON_1 to obtain technical specifications and permits for the operation of a car wash in a non-residential premises, which, according to the register, is a car parking.
2. The court dismissed the claim because the plaintiff did not prove the violation of its rights by the defendant’s actions. The court noted that “Novobud Servis” LLC did not provide sufficient evidence that the defendant’s use of the premises as a car wash violates the plaintiff’s rights as the building manager. The court also took into account that the plaintiff did not prove how the defendant’s lack of permits and technical specifications directly affects the rights and obligations of “Novobud Servis” LLC.
“vis”. The court of appeal agreed with the conclusions of the court of first instance, confirming that the decision was made in compliance with the norms of substantive and procedural law. The Supreme Court also supported these conclusions, indicating that the courts correctly applied the norms of substantive law and did not allow violations of procedural law.
3. The court of cassation left the cassation appeal without satisfaction, and the decisions of the previous instances courts – without changes.
Case No. 176/2268/22 dated May 28, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the actions of the state executor regarding the suspension of enforcement proceedings on the recovery from SE “SkhidHZK” in favor of the applicant of funds as compensation for moral damage caused by health impairment.
2. The court of cassation established that the enforcement proceeding was joined to the consolidated enforcement proceeding, which combines the execution of court decisions made by courts of different jurisdictions. The Supreme Court emphasized that in such cases, complaints against the actions of the state executor are subject to consideration in the order of administrative proceedings, and not civil proceedings. The court took into account the previous conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court regarding the jurisdiction of such disputes. Since the courts of previous instances did not take these circumstances into account and considered the case in the order of civil proceedings, this is a violation of the rules of jurisdiction. The court noted that the essence of the challenged actions is decisive for determining subject-matter jurisdiction.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances courts and closed the proceedings in the case, explaining to the applicant the right to appeal to the administrative court.
Case No. 522/17582/22 dated May 28, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition as illegal of the order on suspension of the employment contract, renewal of the employment contract, recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence and compensation for moral damage.
2. The court of cassation, partially satisfying the cassation appeal of SE “AMPU”, proceeded from the fact that the suspension of the employment contract is possible only if the employer is unable to provide work to the employee and the employee is unable to perform his duties, which in this case was not proven. The court emphasized that the deterioration of the financial condition of the enterprise is not a sufficient basis for the selective suspension of employment contracts with individual employees. At the same time, the court of cassation agreed with the arguments of SE “AMPU” regarding the incorrect calculation of the amount of average earnings for the period of forced absence, pointing to the need to proceed from the employee’s official salary, and not from the actual payments for the last two months of work, since the employee was on downtime during the calculation period. The court also noted that compensation for wages for the period of forced absence
It is the employer’s responsibility if the suspension of the employment contract was illegal. Regarding the cassation appeal of the representative of PERSON_1, the court agreed with the appellate court that sufficient evidence had not been provided to confirm the amount of expenses incurred for professional legal assistance.
3. The court of cassation partially granted the cassation appeal of SE “AMPU”, amending the appellate court’s ruling regarding the recovery of average earnings, reducing its amount, and leaving the additional ruling of the appellate court unchanged.
Case No. 463/2695/24 dated 07/05/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery from an educational institution in favor of a scientific and pedagogical worker of average earnings, which were retained for him in connection with conscription for military service during mobilization.
2. The court of cassation, overturning the decision of the appellate court, proceeded from the fact that, according to the second part of Article 57 of the Law of Ukraine “On Education” (as amended until December 24, 2023), scientific and pedagogical workers called up for military service during mobilization retained their previous average earnings. The court emphasized that this norm is specific in relation to the general norm of the third part of Article 119 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, which was amended by Law No. 2352-IX. The court took into account the previous conclusions of the Supreme Court, according to which a specific norm takes precedence over a general one, and also that Law No. 2352-IX did not amend other laws that provide guarantees for citizens called up for military service upon conscription during mobilization, in particular, for pedagogical or scientific and pedagogical workers. The court also pointed out the error of the court of first instance in calculating the amount of average earnings, since the calculation should be carried out for working days, and not for calendar days.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the appellate court and amended the decision of the court of first instance regarding the recovery of average earnings, increasing its amount to UAH 394,757.09.
Case No. 176/1194/23 dated 05/28/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is an appeal against the actions of the state enforcement officer regarding the suspension of enforcement proceedings for the recovery from SE “SkhidHZK” in favor of an individual of funds for compensation for moral damage caused by health impairment.
2. The court of cassation found that the courts of previous instances did not take into account that the enforcement proceedings had been joined to the consolidated enforcement proceedings, which combined the execution of court decisions rendered by courts of different jurisdictions. In such cases, according to the conclusions of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, disputes regarding appeals against the actions of a state enforcement officer are subject to consideration in the order of administrative court proceedings. The courts had to close the proceedings in the case, since the complaint is not subject to consideration in the order of civilof civil procedure. The appellate court failed to consider that courts verify the observance by the court of first instance of the rules of jurisdiction regardless of the existence of relevant arguments in the application, response, or complaint.
3. The Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the previous instances and closed the proceedings in the case, explaining to the applicant the right to appeal to the administrative court.
Case No. 507/449/24 dated 05/21/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the determination of an additional period for acceptance of inheritance.
2. The Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the appellate court, which closed the appellate proceedings on the complaint of a person who did not participate in the case, but believed that the decision of the court of first instance violated their rights. The court of cassation noted that the appellate court mistakenly decided that the decision to establish an additional period for acceptance of inheritance does not concern the rights and interests of this person, since they are an heir who accepted the inheritance within the period established by law. The Supreme Court emphasized that the proper defendants in such disputes are the heirs who accepted the inheritance, or the territorial community, if there are no such heirs. The court also indicated that the plaintiff’s unawareness of the acceptance of the inheritance by another person is not legally relevant, since they had the opportunity to clarify these circumstances. The Supreme Court emphasized that the appellate court did not take into account that in case of refusal to establish an additional period for acceptance of inheritance, it is the other heir who has the right to the inheritance.
3. The Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the appellate court and sent the case for a new trial to the court of appeal.
Case No. 870/12/24 dated 05/28/2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the application of LLC “Poliotekhnika” for the issuance of an order for the compulsory execution of the decision of the Arbitration Court regarding the recovery of UAH 592,849.86 from LLC “Ukraine”, of which UAH 559,292.48 is a penalty and UAH 33,557.38 is 3% per annum.
2. The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the appellate commercial court, based on the fact that the appellate court correctly established the absence of grounds for refusing to issue an order for the compulsory execution of the arbitral award, provided for in Article 355 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine and Article 56 of the Law of Ukraine “On Arbitration Courts”. The court of cassation noted that the dispute is under the jurisdiction of the arbitration court, the term for applying for the issuance of an order has not been missed, the consideration of the dispute by the arbitration court is provided for by the arbitration agreement, which is valid. The Supreme Court also established that the arguments of LLC “Ukraine” regarding the non-compliance of the composition of the arbitration court with the requirements of the law and the lack of authority of the person who signed the arbitration agreement on behalf of LLC “Poliotekhnika” are unfounded, since the originals of the documents provided by LLC “Poliotekhnika” refute these arguments. In addition, the Supreme Court took into account the prejudicial circumstances established in other cases regarding the validity of the arbitralof the arbitration agreement and the lawfulness of the formation of the composition of the arbitration court.
3. The court ruled to leave the appeal of LLC “Ukraine” unsatisfied, and the ruling of the Western Commercial Court of Appeal unchanged.
Case No. 947/25850/23 dated May 29, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition as illegal of the order of JSC “Ukrainian Railway” to suspend the employment contract with the plaintiff and the recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence from work.
2. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the courts of previous instances regarding the illegality of the suspension of the employment contract, since JSC “Ukrzaliznytsia” did not prove the impossibility of providing the plaintiff with work due to military aggression. The Supreme Court emphasized that although the Labor Code of Ukraine does not directly regulate the issue of payment of average earnings for the period of illegal suspension of the employment contract, the courts reasonably applied the analogy of the law, namely part two of Article 235 of the Labor Code of Ukraine, which provides for the payment of average earnings for the period of forced absence from work upon reinstatement. The court noted that the illegal actions of the defendant deprived the plaintiff of the opportunity to work and violated his constitutional right to timely payment of labor, therefore the recovery of average earnings is justified. Also, the Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s arguments regarding the missed deadline for applying to the court, taking into account the effect of quarantine restrictions, which extended the terms defined by Article 233 of the Labor Code of Ukraine.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of JSC “Ukrainian Railway”, and the decisions of the courts of previous instances remained unchanged.
Case No. 527/3078/23 dated May 29, 2025
1. The subject of the dispute is the determination of the procedure for the mother’s participation in the upbringing and communication with the child, as well as the elimination of obstacles in such communication.
2. The court, partially satisfying the claim, proceeded from the equality of the rights of parents in raising a child, the need to ensure the interests of the child, as well as the importance of restoring emotional contact between the mother and the child. The court took into account that the mother had not communicated with the child for a long time, and therefore determined an adaptation period for the gradual restoration of communication. Also, the court took into account that the defendant obstructed the plaintiff’s communication with her son, which is confirmed by the plaintiff’s appeals to law enforcement agencies. The court emphasized the priority of the child’s interests, which should prevail over the desire of other persons to limit the child from meeting with the mother. The court also referred to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the importance of ensuring family contacts between parents and children.
3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal, and the decision of the court of first instance and the ruling of the court of appeal remained unchanged.
Case No. 289/2500/
**Case № 947/345/22 dated 30/05/2025**
1. The subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of a person’s permanent residence with the testator at the time of the inheritance opening and the recognition of the right to inherit.
2. The court partially satisfied the claims, establishing the fact of the plaintiff’s permanent residence with his father at the time of his death, as the plaintiff provided sufficient evidence confirming this fact, in particular, a certificate from the Radomyshl City Council and witness testimonies confirming that the plaintiff lived with his parents at the same address, despite his registration at another address due to military service; the courts took into account that the actual place of residence does not necessarily coincide with the place of registration, and also took into account the evidence confirming that the plaintiff actually lived with his father at the time of his death, and the court refused to satisfy the claims for recognition of the right to inherit, since this fact is confirmed by the birth certificate, and there is no need for judicial recognition of this right. The court also partially satisfied the application for the distribution of expenses for professional legal assistance, reducing their amount, based on the principle of proportionality and reasonableness, taking into account the scope of services provided and the partial satisfaction of the claims.
3. The court of cassation upheld the cassation appeal without satisfaction, and the decisions of the courts of previous instances – without changes.
**Case № 521/12004/23 dated 28/05/2025**
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the order on declaring a downtime as illegal, recovery of wage arrears and average earnings for the period of delay in settlement upon dismissal.
2. The court of cassation partially satisfied the cassation appeal, indicating that the courts of previous instances correctly concluded on the recovery of wage arrears, since the employer did not make a full settlement with the employee upon dismissal. At the same time, the Supreme Court noted that when determining the amount of average earnings for the period of delay in settlement, the courts mistakenly took into account payments for vacation time, which are not subject to accounting according to the Procedure for Calculating Average Wages. Since the courts did not establish the correct amount of average daily wages, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appellate court regarding the recovery of average earnings and sent the case for a new appellate review. The Supreme Court rejected the defendant’s arguments regarding exemption from liability for the delay in payment of wages, since at the time of the plaintiff’s dismissal, the city of Kherson had already been de-occupied.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appellate court regarding the recovery of average earnings and sent the case in this part for a new review to the court of appellate instance, and regarding the wage arrears, left the decision of the appellate court unchanged.
