1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the unlawful inaction of a communal enterprise and the city council regarding the failure to take measures to bring the civil defense protective structure into readiness and the obligation to take actions to bring it into readiness.
2. The court of cassation agreed with the decisions of the courts of previous instances to leave the prosecutor’s statement of claim without consideration, since the prosecutor applied to the court with demands not provided for by law, namely with a claim to oblige the protective structure to be brought into a state of readiness. The court noted that the protection of the interests of the state in case of violation of the procedure for the maintenance or operation of civil defense structures should be carried out with the use of measures of administrative influence, or by applying to the administrative court with a claim for the application of response measures in the form of a complete or partial suspension of activity. The court emphasized that applying to the court with a claim against a business entity and/or a local self-government body with demands to bring a protective structure into a state of readiness does not belong to the forms of response to violations in this area provided for by law. The court also indicated that the bodies of the State Emergency Service of Ukraine are granted the right to apply to the administrative court only with demands to apply response measures in the form of complete or partial suspension of the operation of business entities, which indicates the exclusivity of the judicial method of protecting these public interests in the event of a threat to life and/or human health, while in other cases the application of administrative coercion measures is provided. The court noted that it departs from the previous position, which was expressed in cases No. 120/17511/23, No. 120/12423/23, No. 120/11541/23.
3. The court decided to leave the cassation appeal of the Vinnytsia Regional Prosecutor’s Office without satisfaction, and the ruling of the Vinnytsia District Administrative Court and the decision of the Seventh Administrative Court of Appeal – without changes.
