1. The subject of the dispute is the complaint of JSC “Chernihivgaz” against the actions and omissions of the private enforcement officer in the enforcement proceedings for the recovery of debt from JSC “Chernihivgaz” in favor of LLC “GC “Naftogaz of Ukraine”.
2. The court of cassation partially satisfied the cassation appeal of JSC “Chernihivgaz”, overturning the decisions of the previous instance courts in the part of refusing to satisfy the complaint against the inaction of the private enforcement officer. The court recognized as unlawful the inaction of the private enforcement officer regarding the failure to suspend enforcement actions and the failure to remove the arrest from the debtor’s funds, since JSC “Chernihivgaz” is in the register of enterprises participating in the debt settlement procedure in accordance with the Law of Ukraine “On measures aimed at overcoming crisis phenomena and ensuring financial stability in the natural gas market”. The court noted that the private enforcement officer was obliged to suspend enforcement actions and remove the arrest from the debtor’s accounts, since he does not have the authority to assess the amount of debt to be settled. The court deviated from the conclusion regarding the identity of asset management and ownership rights, noting that ARMA asset management does not change the title of ownership.
3. The court of cassation overturned the decisions of the previous instance courts in the part of refusing to satisfy the complaint of JSC “Chernihivgaz” against the inaction of the private enforcement officer and satisfied this complaint, obliging the private enforcement officer to suspend enforcement actions and remove the arrest from the debtor’s funds.
