1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of debt under the supply agreement, namely the principal debt, penalty, 3% per annum, and inflation losses.<\/p>\n
2. The Supreme Court reversed the decisions of previous instances regarding the recovery of penalty, 3% per annum, and inflation losses, as the courts failed to consider that the penalty for violation of a monetary obligation is established by the agreement with the consent of the parties, and in this case, the courts did not establish the circumstances of agreeing on such a type of liability. Also, the courts did not examine the circumstances of partial payment of the debt by the defendant and did not take into account the conclusions of the Supreme Court regarding the calculation of inflation losses in case of partial debt repayment. The court emphasized that when calculating inflation losses, it is necessary to take into account months of deflation, and the amount of repayment should be deducted from the principal debt balance indexed for the previous month. The Court referred to the \u043f\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0430\u043d\u043e\u0432\u0443 (resolution) of the Supreme Court dated 02.07.2025 in case No. 910\/9181\/24, which is taken into account when reviewing this case, considering the provisions of part 4 of Article 300 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine.<\/p>\n
3. The Supreme Court reversed the decisions of previous instances regarding the recovery of penalty, 3% per annum, and inflation losses and remanded the case in this part for a new trial to the court of first instance.<\/p>\n