The subject of the dispute is the reclamation of agricultural land by the prosecutor in the interests of the state represented by the Nikolske Settlement Council from the illegal possession of PERSON_1 and SE “Illich-Agro Donbas”, as well as the cancellation of the decision on state registration of the lease right.
The Supreme Court partially satisfied the prosecutor’s cassation appeal, overturning the decisions of the previous instances regarding the claims against SE “Illich-Agro Donbas” and closing the proceedings in this part, since the dispute between a legal entity and an individual (entrepreneur) is subject to consideration in a commercial court, not a civil court. The court of cassation agreed with the conclusions of the previous instances regarding the refusal to satisfy the claim against PERSON_1, since the prosecutor did not prove with proper evidence the illegality of PERSON_2’s acquisition of ownership of the disputed land plot, and therefore the illegality of its reclamation from PERSON_1, who purchased it under a purchase and sale agreement. The court noted that the existence of a copy of another order of the State Geocadastre with the same number, but different content, is not an unconditional proof of forgery of the order on the basis of which the ownership right was registered. The court of cassation also overturned the additional decisions of the previous instances on the recovery from the prosecutor’s office of expenses for legal assistance in favor of SE “Illich-Agro Donbas”, since the main decision regarding this company was overturned.
Note: In this case, the Supreme Court refers to the legal position set out in the resolution of the Supreme Court as part of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court dated May 05, 2025 in case No. 199/9897/22 (proceedings No. 61-14436svo24), to which the cassation proceedings in this case were suspended.
