1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of UAH 2,921,849.08.<\/p>\n
2. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s decision, noting that the appellate court incorrectly applied the provisions of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the consequences of the plaintiff’s failure to appear at the court session. The court of first instance rightfully dismissed the claim without consideration, as the plaintiff was duly notified of the date, time, and place of the court session, failed to appear at the session, did not report the reasons for the failure to appear, and did not file a motion to have the case heard in their absence. The appellate court erroneously referred to the outdated practice of the Supreme Court and did not take into account the mandatory nature of the provisions of the Commercial Procedure Code, which obligate the court to dismiss the claim without consideration under such circumstances. **:** The Court indicated that the appellate court did not take into account the conclusions of the Supreme Court, set forth in the rulings of November 18, 2023, in case No. 905\/458\/21 and of March 17, 2023, in case No. 910\/17906\/21, regarding the grounds for applying the provisions of part four of Article 202 and paragraph 4 of part one of Article 226 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine.<\/p>\n
3. The Supreme Court granted the cassation appeal of PJSC JSB “Ukrgasbank”: overturned the appellate court’s decision and upheld the ruling of the court of first instance dismissing the claim without consideration.<\/p>\n