{"id":12280,"date":"2025-10-02T10:17:31","date_gmt":"2025-10-02T07:17:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/10\/case-%e2%84%96953-19731-20-dated-24-09-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-10-02T10:17:31","modified_gmt":"2025-10-02T07:17:31","slug":"case-%e2%84%96953-19731-20-dated-24-09-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/10\/case-%e2%84%96953-19731-20-dated-24-09-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case \u2116953\/19731\/20 dated 24\/09\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>1. The subject of the dispute is the legality of the transfer of a land plot of forestry purpose into private ownership and its reclamation into state ownership.<\/p>\n<p>2. The court of cassation noted that the prosecutor does not have the authority to represent the interests of a state enterprise in court, therefore, the claims in the interests of SE &#8220;Kharkiv Forest Research Station&#8221; are not subject to consideration. Regarding the claims in the interests of the State Agency of Forest Resources of Ukraine, the court indicated that the claim for the recovery of the land plot is an effective method of protection, and the claims regarding appealing the decisions of local self-government bodies and canceling the state act are not proper methods of protection. The court also noted that for the correct resolution of the dispute, it is necessary to establish whether PERSON_1 is a bona fide acquirer, taking into account changes in the legislation regarding the protection of the rights of bona fide acquirers, as well as from what time the ownership right of the first acquirer was registered. Since the appellate court did not investigate these circumstances, the case regarding the reclamation of the land plot must be sent for a new trial. The court partially deviated from previous conclusions regarding the distinction between vindicatory and negatory claims, clarifying that the determining criterion is the presence or absence of the plaintiff&#8217;s possession of the property, which is determined based on the principle of registration confirmation of possession.<\/p>\n<p>3. The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appellate court regarding the claims in the interests of SE &#8220;Kharkiv Forest Research Station&#8221;, left the claim in this part unconsidered, changed the reasoning part of the decision of the appellate court regarding the refusal to satisfy the claim to declare illegal the decisions of the local self-government body and cancel the state act, and sent the case for a new trial to the court of appeal regarding the claims for the reclamation of the land plot.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/130494751\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>1. The subject of the dispute is the legality of the transfer of a land plot of forestry purpose into private ownership and its reclamation into state ownership. 2. The court of cassation noted that the prosecutor does not have the authority to represent the interests of a state enterprise in court, therefore, the claims&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[57,42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-12280","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-court-practice-ukraine","category-eu-legislation-important","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12280","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12280"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12280\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12280"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12280"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12280"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}