1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal of the state executor’s order on the seizure of the debtor’s funds in enforcement proceedings.
2. The court of cassation reviewed the decisions of previous instances, which recognized as unlawful the state executor’s order on the seizure of funds of PJSC “Cherkasyoblenergo.” The previous courts reasoned that the state executor is obliged to check the status of the debtor’s compliance with court decisions before imposing the seizure, otherwise it violates the principles of fairness and impartiality. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court disagreed with this conclusion, noting that checking the execution of decisions is a right, not an obligation of the executor, and that the law sets strict deadlines for the seizure of property, which makes it impossible to conduct a check. In addition, the court emphasized the debtor’s obligation to inform the executor about partial execution of the decision, and the occurrence of negative consequences due to failure to fulfill this obligation is not an unlawful inaction of the executor. The court also drew attention to the fact that the previous courts did not establish whether the plaintiff had submitted documents on payment of part of the debt.
3. The court overturned the decisions of the first and appellate instances and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
**** In the decision, the court notes that it is departing from the previous position that was in other decisions of the Supreme Court.
