Case No. 923/69/22 dated 30/01/2025
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the amount of legal assistance expenses must be proportionate to the complexity of the case, the volume of services provided, and comply with the criteria of reasonableness. The court took into account that the response to the cassation complaint consisted of only 5 pages, and some of the lawyer’s claimed services (such as familiarizing with the text of the resolution) were not necessary. At the same time, the court considered the lawyer’s participation in the court session.
Case No. 909/516/23 dated 29/01/2025
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the plaintiff chose an ineffective method of protecting her rights. The court noted that in this situation, the appropriate method of protection would have been claiming the property from illegal possession (vindication claim), as this would have been the only way to verify the good faith of the property acquirer and ensure a balance of interests of all parties. The court also took into account that the method of protection chosen by the plaintiff would not have led to the actual restoration of her rights, as the property would not have been returned to her ownership.
Case No. 916/926/21 dated 23/01/2025
The court noted that the courts of previous instances did not take into account the special legal regime for using water fund lands and coastal protective strips, did not properly verify the legal status of the disputed land plot, and did not assess the arguments about its inappropriate use due to dacha house construction. The courts also did not take into account that terminating the lease agreement without a claim for land plot return is an appropriate and effective method of protection.
Case No. 922/2687/22 dated 15/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that after purchasing real estate on a leased land plot, the new owner automatically inherits the right to lease this plot by operation of law. Since LLC ‘Rod-Nik Invest’ purchased real estate on a leased plot, it became the new lessee and is obligated to pay rent. The court also took into account that the lease agreement was valid at the time of the defendant’s property acquisition.
Case No. 906/562/20 dated 22/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that after the lease agreement expired, the entrepreneur continued to unlawfully use the trading platforms and did not return them to the lessor. At the same time, the court noted that the trading platforms are an independent object of civil rights, distinct from the land plot on which they are located. Therefore, the plaintiff’s lack of rights to the land plot does not affect his right to demand the return of the platforms and collect a penalty.
Case No. 908/1074/24 dated 30/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the plaintiff (bank) has the right at its discretion to leave the claims against one of the defendants without consideration at the preparatory stage of the process. This right stems from the principle of dispositiveness in commercial proceedings and does not require the consent of other case participants. In a joint obligation, the creditor may demand performance from all debtors together or from each separately.
Case No. 947/22776/22 dated 27/01/2025
Subject of dispute: appealing the court verdict regarding a Ukrainian Armed Forces serviceman convicted of state treason and desertion for transitioning to service in the Russian Armed Forces in Crimea in 2014. The court was guided by the following arguments: 1) It was proven that the accused, being a submarine commander of the Ukrainian Navy, refused to withdraw the submarine to the mainland part of Ukraine and transitioned…1. Regarding the case of service in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation:
The Supreme Court upheld the first instance verdict, which sentenced the accused to 13 years of imprisonment with confiscation of property. The court was guided by the fact that: 1) the accused was a member of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation; 2) witness testimonies and open-source data confirm the fact of the accused’s service in the Russian army; 3) The accused was aware of the order to arrive for further service in the territory controlled by Ukraine but ignored it.
2. Regarding the case of contract price adjustment:
The court in making its decision was guided by the fact that: 1) additional agreements did not increase the price per unit of goods by more than 10% of the initial price; 2) expert opinions from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry confirm price fluctuations for the goods increasing by 10.2% and 10.7%; 3) the court expert’s conclusion confirmed that the price specified in the contract corresponded to the market value, and there was a constant increase in consumer prices.
3. Regarding legal assistance expenses:
The court in making its decision was guided by the fact that the amount of legal assistance expenses must meet the criteria of reality, reasonableness, and proportionality. The court took into account that at the appellate stage, the legal position was already formed and did not require significant additional study, and the representative’s participation in court sessions occurred via video conference. The court also noted that the cassation complaint concerned only procedural issues and did not require an in-depth study of the regulatory framework.
4. Regarding land ownership transfer:
The cassation instance court found that previous courts did not properly analyze paragraph 24 of Section X ‘Transitional Provisions’ of the Land Code of Ukraine regarding the moment of land plot transfer from state to communal ownership. In particular, it was not taken into account that termination of permanent use rights for a state enterprise after this paragraph came into force does not automatically mean transfer of the plot to communal ownership. The courts also did not verify the effectiveness of the method chosen by the prosecutor to protect violated rights.
5. Regarding bodily injury case:
The subject of the dispute was challenging the verdict and ruling concerning the conviction of three persons for intentional grievous bodily harm and intentional moderate bodily harm. The court took into account that for the charge of intentional moderate bodily harm (Part 1, Article 122 of the Criminal Code), the statute of limitations for criminal prosecution had expired. At the same time, the court left unchanged the verdict regarding intentional grievous bodily harm (Part 2, Article 121 of the Criminal Code) with a punishment of 5 years of imprisonment. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the cassation appeals, releasing the convicted persons from liability under Part 1, Article 122 of the Criminal Code due to the expiration of limitation periods, but maintained the verdict under Part 2, Article 121 of the Criminal Code.
6. Regarding debt collection for petroleum products:
The subject of the dispute was collection of debt under a petroleum products supply contract and penalty sanctions totaling 2.57 million hryvnias. The court in making its decision was guided by the fact that the plaintiff did not prove by proper and admissible evidence the fact of goods transfer to the defendant – invoices and waybills contained signatures that could not be identified as the defendant’s director’s signatures, and stamp impressions did not belong to the defendant according to the expert’s conclusion. Moreover, the defendant subsequently excluded disputed tax invoices from their tax accounting, which also indicates the absence of actual goods delivery. The court denied satisfaction of the claim for debt collection and penalty sanctions, as the fact of goods delivery was not proven.The mere fact of goods delivery.
Case No. 924/595/24 dated 30/01/2025
Subject of Dispute: Challenging the Antimonopoly Committee’s decision to recognize the concerted actions of two companies in public procurement as anti-competitive and imposing fines. Main Court Arguments: 1) First and appellate instance courts incorrectly assessed evidence by examining them separately rather than comprehensively. 2) When considering cases of anti-competitive concerted actions, it is necessary to investigate all circumstances in complex – labor relations between participants, synchronicity of actions, use of common IP addresses, etc. 3) To qualify actions as anti-competitive, it is sufficient to establish the mere fact of coordinating the behavior of bidders, which eliminates competition between them. Court Decision: Cancel the decisions of previous instances and refer the case for new consideration to the court of first instance for proper assessment of all evidence in their totality.
Case No. 910/3433/21 dated 30/01/2025
Subject of Dispute: Invalidation of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine’s decision recognizing JSC “Kharkivmisgaz” actions as abuse of monopoly position and imposing a fine. Main Court Arguments: 1) JSC “Kharkivmisgaz” belongs to a company group occupying a monopoly position in the natural gas distribution market; 2) the company abused this position by making unreasonable demands regarding the presence of a special test protocol when purchasing gas meters; 3) such actions limited competition and infringed on the interests of other gas meter manufacturers who could not obtain this protocol. Court Decision: The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of previous instances, which rejected the claim of JSC “Kharkivmisgaz” to invalidate the Antimonopoly Committee’s decision.
Case No. 922/2640/23 dated 16/01/2025
Subject of Dispute – Consideration of monetary claims by LLC “Borey-S” for 34.9 million UAH against the debtor LLC “Refill” in a bankruptcy case. The appellate court violated procedural law by not evaluating the reasons for the creditor’s failure to submit to the first instance court an important piece of evidence – an agreement on termination of petroleum products supply contract. The court merely formally rejected this evidence without substantively examining the creditor’s explanations regarding the validity of reasons for its non-submission earlier. The court also did not provide reasons for rejecting the applicant’s arguments, which contradicts the requirements of procedural legislation regarding the substantiation of a court decision. The Supreme Court canceled the appellate court’s resolution and referred the case for new consideration to properly assess all arguments and evidence of case participants.
Case No. 916/1230/24 dated 30/01/2025
Subject of Dispute – Invalidation of supplementary agreements to electricity supply contract and recovery of unjustly received funds. When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the disputed supplementary agreements were concluded in violation of the Law of Ukraine “On Public Procurement”, as they improperly increased the price per unit of goods by more than 10% from the initial contract price (up to 25.9%), which is inadmissible according to the position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. Moreover, the price change occurred regarding already supplied electricity, which also contradicts legislation. The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of previous instances on invalidating supplementary agreements and recovering from the supplier in favor of the city council overpaid funds amounting to 499,288.78 UAH.
Case No. 906/1153/23 dated 30/01/2025Here is the translation:
Supplies electricity through the networks of the main consumer FOP Sholokha V.V. at the first voltage class. Moreover, the contract concluded between the parties already establishes the connection voltage corresponding to the first class. The court also took into account the prejudicial decision in another case, where the plaintiff’s actions regarding charging the defendant a tariff for the second voltage class were already recognized as unlawful.
Case No. 914/3157/23 dated 22/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the director of LLC ‘Ekoekspertyza’, who was simultaneously the sole participant with a 100% share, had the right to conclude a significant transaction without a separate decision of the general meeting, as the legislation does not require consent from oneself. The court also considered that one cannot abuse the right and use the absence of a separate decision as a basis for declaring the contract invalid if it causes harm to the other party to the contract.
Case No. 463/3618/22 dated 29/01/2025
The subject of the dispute concerns the legality of closing a criminal proceeding against a customs state inspector due to the expiration of pre-trial investigation terms. The court was guided by the fact that since the criminal proceeding was initiated before March 16, 2018 (when amendments to the CPC came into force), and then another proceeding was separated from it, the new rules on closing the case due to investigation term expiration do not apply to the separated proceeding. Moreover, according to the position of the United Chamber of the CCC, in such proceedings, the prosecutor had the authority to extend pre-trial investigation terms. The Supreme Court canceled the decisions of previous instances on closing the criminal proceeding and sent the case for a new review to the court of first instance.
Case No. 910/14503/23 dated 27/01/2025
Subject of the dispute: invalidation of the decision of the general meeting of members of the car garage cooperative from row No. 20 on electing an authorized representative. When making a decision, the court was guided by the following: 1) one of the plaintiffs (PERSON_1) does not have a garage in row No. 20, therefore has no right to challenge the meeting’s decision; 2) invalidating the decision on delegating an authorized representative cannot lead to restoration of the plaintiffs’ rights, as the Ministry of Justice has already canceled registration actions regarding the cooperative; 3) the method of protecting rights chosen by the plaintiffs (invalidating the meeting’s decision) is ineffective and will not restore their violated rights. The court denied the claim, as the method of protecting rights chosen by the plaintiffs is ineffective.
Case No. 912/242/24 dated 23/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that LLC ‘Prydniprovska Station’ did not prove the existence of a violated right or legitimate interest regarding obtaining a land plot for lease, as it did not provide evidence of owning real estate objects on the disputed plot. Moreover, at the time of the company’s appeal, the lessor was already in the process of renewing the contract with the previous lessee.
Case No. 903/280/24 dated 28/01/2025
Subject of the dispute: recovery of debt for delivered goods and counterclaims for penalty for non-delivery of part of the goods under an agricultural product supply contract. When making a decision, the court was guided by the following: 1) the buyer accepted the goods without remarks, therefore is obligated to pay for them; 2) the buyer’s right to withhold payment did not arise, as they have already become the owner of the received goods; 3) the penalty amount for non-delivery of the remaining goods is subject to reduction, as the buyer did not prove the existence of damages, and the large penalty amount shows signs of a punitive sanction. The Supreme Court left the decision unchanged.Regarding the previous instances’ decision on collecting debt from the buyer for the delivered goods and collecting a reduced penalty amount from the supplier for non-delivery of a part of the goods.
Case No. 903/335/24 dated 03/02/2025
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the military unit is not a proper defendant in the case, as it was only the cargo recipient in the economic relations between the Ministry of Defense and the supplier (LLC). According to the supply agreement and guarantee letter, the supplier undertook the obligation to pay all transportation costs. Moreover, the cargo was not issued to the military unit due to the supplier’s debt to the railway.
Case No. 341/390/23 dated 29/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is appealing the verdict of the court of first instance and the ruling of the appellate court regarding the conviction of a person for illegal actions with narcotic substances under Part 3 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Since this is only the operative part of the resolution, the court does not provide arguments for its decision. However, the fact that the cassation complaint was left without satisfaction indicates that the Supreme Court agreed with the correctness of the qualification of the convicted person’s actions and the punishment assigned by the lower courts. The Supreme Court left the decisions of the previous instances unchanged and the defense counsel’s cassation complaint without satisfaction.
Case No. 910/1899/24 dated 29/01/2025
When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the fact that the guarantor was fully aware of the scope of his obligations under the guarantee agreement, voluntarily gave consent to its conclusion, and the content of the agreement does not contradict the legislation and corresponds to the will of the parties. Moreover, the guarantor had already participated in another case regarding the collection of funds under this agreement and did not declare its invalidity.
Case No. 920/688/23 dated 28/01/2025
Subject of the dispute: termination of the land lease agreement and return of land plots due to the lessee’s improper use of hayfields and pastures by plowing them. When rendering the decision, the court was guided by the following arguments: 1) Users of agricultural land plots must use them in accordance with the type of use for which these plots were transferred to them by the owner; 2) The appellate court did not take into account the standard of proof, according to which a circumstance is subject to proof so that the conclusion about its existence is more probable than the opposite; 3) The appellate court did not assess the fact that the defendant did not dispute the fact of plowing the land plots. The Supreme Court canceled the appellate court’s ruling and sent the case for a new review to the appellate court for a complete and comprehensive examination of evidence.
Case No. 910/15777/23 dated 30/01/2025
The court was guided by the fact that the defendant violated the payment terms for services for the period of March-September 2022 and February-June 2023. According to Article 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, in case of delay in a monetary obligation, the debtor is obliged to pay the debt amount taking into account the inflation index and 3% per annum. The court took into account that the interest was accrued at the rate established by law and does not require reduction.
Case No. 537/984/20 dated 27/01/2025
The subject of the dispute is appealing the court verdict regarding a group of persons accused of robbery, theft, and causing bodily injuries. The court established that the actions of the accused did not contain signs of robbery by prior conspiracy, as the conflict arose spontaneously and was not aimed at seizing property. Two accused inflicted bodilyTranslation:
And injuries motivated by revenge, and the third person later secretly stole the victim’s phone. The court also took into account that one of the accused had not reached the age of criminal responsibility at the time of the crime, and the statute of limitations had expired for other episodes.
As a result of the review, the Supreme Court partially satisfied the prosecutor’s cassation appeal – canceled previous court decisions and closed criminal proceedings against one accused due to not reaching the age of criminal responsibility, released the second from liability due to the expiration of limitation periods, and for the third – reclassified actions and sentenced to 4 years of imprisonment.
[Case No. 907/48/24 dated 30/01/2025]
The subject of the dispute is recovery of damages from the State Specialized Economic Enterprise “Forests of Ukraine” in the amount of 18 million UAH, caused by illegal tree cutting. The court in making its decision was guided by the following: 1) the respondent, as a permanent forest user, is obligated to ensure forest protection from illegal logging; 2) the fact of illegal cutting of 1,042 trees on the respondent’s territory is confirmed by inspection protocols, stump list data, and expert opinion; 3) the respondent’s improper performance of forest protection duties led to illegal logging and damage.
The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of previous courts on recovering 18 million UAH in damages from the respondent for violation of environmental legislation.
[Case No. 214/11040/21 dated 29/01/2025]
The subject of the dispute is appealing the court verdict regarding a driver who caused a fatal traffic accident while intoxicated. The court was guided by the following: 1) expertise established 3 per mille of alcohol in the driver’s blood, confirmed by properly executed medical documents; 2) the defense’s version about passenger interference in vehicle control was refuted by witness testimonies and expert conclusions; 3) the driver violated traffic rules by moving at a speed over 75 km/h in a populated area, which led to loss of vehicle control.
The Supreme Court upheld the verdict of the first instance and appellate courts, sentencing the driver to 9 years of imprisonment with deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for 10 years.
[Case No. 642/3614/17 dated 28/01/2025]
The court was guided by the fact that the state registrar acted exclusively within her official powers when registering a legal entity. The Prosecutor’s Office did not provide evidence that the registrar abused her official position or acted in collusion with other persons. The court also noted that issues regarding the land plot were not within the registrar’s competence but belonged to the powers of other city council officials.
[Case No. 916/538/24 dated 29/01/2025]
Subject of the dispute: recognition of an additional agreement on renewal of a municipal land lease contract. When considering the case, the court was guided by the fact that to renew a land lease agreement, the lessee must properly prove the fact of sending a notification to the lessor about the intention to use the preferential right to conclude a contract for a new term. The court indicated that providing only a light copy of a courier service invoice without a fiscal receipt and other documents confirming the reality of service provision is insufficient evidence of sending such notification, especially if the lessor denies its receipt.
The Supreme Court canceled the decisions of previous courts and sent the case for a new review to properly establish the fact of the lessee’s notification about contract renewal.
