Here is a detailed analysis of the court decision, prepared from a professional perspective:
1. **Subject Matter of the Dispute:** The owner of a land plot filed a lawsuit seeking to declare a land lease agreement non-concluded (void ab initio), to cancel the state registration of the lease right, and to recover the land plot on the grounds that the owner did not sign the disputed agreement.
2. **Court Arguments:**
* Based on the conclusion of a forensic handwriting examination, the court established that the signature on the lease agreement on behalf of the lessor was executed by another person, which indicates the absence of the owner’s intent to conclude the transaction.
* The Supreme Court emphasized that in the event of contesting the very fact of the agreement’s conclusion, such a fact does not require a separate lawsuit for invalidation; rather, it must be established in the reasoning part of the judgment when resolving the dispute regarding the protection of the violated right.
* The court noted that the claim to declare an agreement “void” (null and void) is an improper method of protection, as a void transaction is such by operation of law; therefore, the claim should be denied in this part.
* At the same time, the cancellation of the state registration of the real right and the recovery of the land plot were recognized as an effective method of protection that ensures the actual restoration of the owner’s violated rights.
* The court emphasized that the inconsistency of the claims with a proper method of protection is not a ground for dismissal of the lawsuit if the plaintiff’s intent is clear and the claims can be interpreted as being aimed at removing obstacles to the use of property.
* **Legal Precedent:** In this decision, the Supreme Court refers to its position set forth in the judgment of the Grand Chamber dated May 13, 2026, in case No. 456/252/22, which establishes an approach to protecting the owner’s rights through the cancellation of state registration in the event that the non-conclusion of a lease agreement is proven.
3. **Court Judgment:** The Supreme Court partially satisfied the cassation appeal, overturned the appellate court’s resolution, upheld the court of first instance’s decision regarding the cancellation of state registration and the recovery of the land plot, but denied the claim to declare the lease agreement void.
