1. The subject of the dispute is the challenge of the actions and decision of the Department of Urban Planning and Architecture of the executive body of the Irpin City Council regarding the issuance of urban planning conditions and restrictions (UPCR) for the construction of an apartment building.
2. The Supreme Court noted that a public organization has the right to apply to the court in the interests of its members if it is provided for in its charter and related to the purpose of its activity. The court also pointed out the error in considering the case in simplified proceedings due to its social significance. A key point was the issue of compliance of the Territory Zoning Plan (zoning) of the city of Irpin of 2013 with the current General Plan of 2018, since the plaintiff claimed that the development intentions did not comply with the General Plan. The court emphasized that the courts of previous instances did not properly assess these arguments, which made it impossible to establish the actual circumstances of the case. The Court referred to its previous ruling of 19.06.2024 in case No. 320/10145/21, which stated that in case of non-compliance of the Territory Zoning Plan (zoning) of the city of Irpin of 2013 with the updated General Plan, the updated General Plan of the territory of the city of Irpin should be applied as the main urban planning document.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous courts and sent the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.
