1. The subject of the dispute was the recognition as illegal and cancellation of the order of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, which canceled the decisions of private notaries on the registration of ownership of the grain terminal by Sanolta Korm LLC and subsequent transfers of ownership.
2. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances, reasoning that the courts did not take into account the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court regarding the subject composition of the parties in disputes regarding the cancellation of orders of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, namely, that in disputes concerning property rights to property, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine cannot be the sole defendant, since the dispute must be resolved between persons who have property rights and interests in this property. The court noted that in this case, the dispute arose regarding property rights to the grain terminal, therefore, the proper defendant is Olimpex Coupe International LLC, which disputes the legitimacy of the plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership of this terminal, and not only the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine. Since the plaintiff did not involve Olimpex Coupe International LLC as a co-defendant, the court concluded that the claim should be dismissed due to its presentation to an improper defendant.
3. The court overturned the decisions of the previous instances and refused to satisfy the claim of Sanolta Korm LLC.
: The court indicated that it departs from the previous conclusions of the Commercial Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court regarding disputes where the Ministry of Justice can be the sole defendant, and regarding claims to challenge the order of the Ministry of Justice, which do not lead to the full protection of the plaintiff’s rights.
