1. The subject of the dispute is the cancellation of the state registration of the right to lease land plots and the termination of land lease agreements.
2. The court of cassation overturned the decisions of the courts of previous instances, indicating that the plaintiff had chosen an improper method of protecting their rights, since the proper method of protection in this case is the requirement to recognize the absence of the right to lease, and not the cancellation of the state registration of this right; the courts of previous instances did not take into account that at the time of the case’s consideration, “Western Agricultural Production Company” LLC was using the disputed land plots as a lessee under agreements dated April 2, 2016, concluded between the plaintiff and “Roztotske” LLC; the right to lease of “Western Agricultural Production Company” LLC is registered in the State Register of Real Property Rights on the basis of additional agreements to the land lease agreements, which, in particular, replaced the lessee from “Roztotske” LLC to “Western Agricultural Production Company” LLC, changed the lease term; since the plaintiff referred to the failure of “Roztotske” LLC to fulfill its obligations to pay rent as the basis for terminating the lease agreements of April 2, 2016, which is not a party to the specified lease agreements at the time of the case’s consideration, there are no grounds for their termination in accordance with clause d) of the first part of Article 141 of the Land Code of Ukraine. The court noted that it departs from the conclusion stated in the resolution of the Supreme Court as part of the panel of judges of the Third Judicial Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court dated December 4, 2024, in case No. 130/8/23 (proceedings No. 61-6874sv24), which concluded that an effective method of protection in the case of registration of an unexecuted lease agreement is the cancellation of state registration.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the courts of previous instances and denied the claims of PERSON_1.
Skip to content
Skip to sidebar
Skip to footer
