**Case No. 398\/4974\/24 dated 05\/12\/2025**<\/p>\n
1. The subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of termination of the mortgage due to the liquidation of the mortgagee without legal successors.<\/p>\n
2. The court of cassation upheld the decisions of the courts of previous instances, which left the application for the establishment of a fact of legal significance without consideration, as a dispute over law is apparent. The court took into account that the applicant had repeatedly applied to the court with claims regarding the change of the mortgagee, and court decisions had already established the fact of non-transfer of rights of claim from the bank to the company, which the applicant indicated as the liquidated mortgagee. In addition, there is a court decision on foreclosure of the mortgage item in favor of the bank. The court noted that in cases of separate proceedings, the provisions regarding adversarial proceedings and the limits of judicial review do not apply, therefore the court has the right, on its own initiative, to request the necessary evidence. The court also rejected the arguments of the cassation appeal that the courts did not take into account the conclusions of the Supreme Court, since in the cases cited by the applicant, the review was carried out in claim, and not separate, proceedings.<\/p>\n
3. The court of cassation left the cassation appeal without satisfaction, and the decisions of the courts of previous instances – without changes.<\/p>\n
**Case No. 570\/3813\/22 dated 26\/11\/2025**<\/p>\n
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of property as jointly owned property of spouses, recognition of contracts (donation, superficies) as invalid, cancellation of the decision on state registration of ownership and recovery of property from someone else’s illegal possession.<\/p>\n
2. The court of cassation, partially overturning the decision of the appellate court, was guided by the following:
\n * Property acquired by the spouses during the marriage is their joint joint property, unless otherwise established by contract or law, and each of the spouses has equal rights to possess, use and dispose of this property.
\n * A contract of donation of joint joint property of the spouses, concluded without the consent of the other spouse, is invalid in its entirety, and not in part, as decided by the appellate court, referring to the legal position of the Joint Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court of June 15, 2020 in case No. 430\/1281\/14-\u0446.
\n * The claim for recovery of property is derived from the claim for recognition of the donation agreement as invalid, therefore these claims must be resolved simultaneously.
\n * The superficies agreement is not included in the chain of agreements regarding the disputed property, but is a separate agreement that was concluded for a certain period and terminated after its expiration, therefore there are no grounds for recognizing it as invalid.
\n * Claims regarding a residential building are not subject to satisfaction, since construction began after the dissolution of the marriage, and the plaintiff did not prove that the house was built during the marriage.<\/p>\n
3. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the ca
\nupheld the cassation appeal, overturned the appellate court’s ruling regarding the claims for invalidation of the gift agreement and recovery of property, remanded the case in this part for a new hearing to the appellate court, amended the reasoning part of the ruling regarding the claims for invalidation of the superficies agreement, and otherwise upheld the appellate court’s ruling.<\/p>\n
Case No. 600\/3079\/24-\u0430 dated 05\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court, when considering the cassation appeal, noted that the responsibility for paying insurance contributions lies with the enterprise-insurer, not the employee, even if they hold the position of director. The court emphasized that the lack of payment of contributions due to the fault of the enterprise cannot deprive a person of the right to have the period of work credited to the insurance record, as this contradicts the principles of social protection. Also, the court took into account that the director, although performing managerial functions, is not identical to the insurer within the meaning of the law. The court pointed out the inadmissibility of shifting the consequences of the enterprise’s unfair payment of contributions to the employee. In addition, the court emphasized that the presence or absence of payment of insurance contributions by the employer does not disprove the very fact that the plaintiff performed their labor duties.<\/p>\n 3. The court of cassation partially satisfied the cassation appeal, overturning the decisions of the lower courts in the part refusing to credit certain periods to the insurance record, and obliged the Pension Fund to reconsider the application for the assignment of a pension, taking into account these periods.<\/p>\n Case No. 560\/12765\/24 dated 03\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court partially satisfied the cassation appeal of the tax authority, overturning the decision of the appellate court in the part of personal income tax, military levy, and unified social contribution, and remanded the case for a new hearing to the court of appellate instance, since the appellate court did not fully clarify the circumstances of the case and did not properly assess the arguments of the parties and evidence, in particular, regarding the correctness of the formation of expenses of the individual entrepreneur, the underestimation of the amount of taxable income for 2019-2021, and did not assess the acts on non-submission of documents. At the same time, the Supreme Court agreed with the appellate court regarding the cancellation of tax assessment notices regarding VAT, since the tax authority did not prove the fact of free transfer of goods\/services and the illegality of the taxpayer’s actions regarding the balances of commodity stocks, as well as the legality of applying penalties for not 3. The court partially overturned the decision of the appellate court and remanded the case for a new trial to the court of appellate instance regarding personal income tax, military levy, and unified social contribution, and left the decision of the appellate court unchanged in the remaining part.<\/p>\n Case No. 920\/1045\/25 dated 03\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The court of cassation agreed with the decision of the appellate court, which overturned the ruling of the court of first instance on the closure of proceedings in the case. The court of first instance mistakenly believed that a similar dispute had already been resolved in the bankruptcy case, but the appellate court reasonably pointed out the lack of identity of the subject composition of the parties and that the ruling on the satisfaction of the liquidator’s motion in the bankruptcy case is not analogous to court decisions that are the basis for closing proceedings in the case. The Supreme Court emphasized that for the closure of proceedings, a complete identity of the parties, subject matter, and grounds of the dispute is necessary, which was not established in this case. The court of cassation also referred to its own practice regarding the inadmissibility of forming different conclusions regarding the circumstances and legal relations between the parties, but recognized that in this case there are no grounds for applying this practice.<\/p>\n The court ruled to leave the cassation appeal without satisfaction, and the decision of the appellate court without changes.<\/p>\n Case No. 522\/24207\/15-\u0446 dated 19\/11\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation established that the appellate court did not take into account the proper notification of the defendant (bank) about the consideration of the case in the court of first instance, since the bank’s representative received a copy of the claim with attachments. Also, the appellate court did not pay attention to the fact that the bank knew about the alienation of the mortgaged property to a third party back in 2019, but filed an appeal only in 2021, which may indicate bad faith on the part of the bank. The court of cassation emphasized the importance of adhering to the principle of legal certainty, which requires respect for final court decisions, and indicated that the cancellation of a default judgment after a significant period of time may violate this principle. In addition, the court of cassation noted that the appellate court did not verify whether the satisfaction of the application for review of the default judgment would be justified in view of the changed circumstances, and whethwill meet the requirements of justice.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s decision and remanded the case for a new appellate review.<\/p>\n Case No. 462\/7879\/23 dated 26\/11\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of first instance, with which the appellate court agreed, refused to satisfy the claim, citing the absence in the case file of evidence of the mother’s intentional failure to perform her parental duties and her culpable conduct towards the children, considering the deprivation of parental rights an inexpedient and unjustified measure. The Supreme Court did not agree with these conclusions, pointing to an incomplete examination of the evidence, in particular, ignoring the mother’s statement of admission of the claim, evidence of inadequate care for the children, the removal of the children from the family, as well as the failure to take into account the children’s opinion. The court of cassation emphasized the need to ensure the best interests of the child, taking into account the opinion of the guardianship authority, as well as the importance of hearing the children’s opinion in such cases. The court also noted that the courts of previous instances did not properly assess the collected evidence and the mother’s behavior, and did not state the motives and arguments that indicate her deliberate neglect of her duties.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous courts and remanded the case for a new trial to the court of first instance.<\/p>\n Case No. 990\/51\/25 dated 04\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed with the decision of the court of first instance to close the proceedings in the case, noting that an appeal against the HQCJ’s decision on the judge’s unsuitability for the position held is possible only after the High Council of Justice (HCJ) considers this issue. The court emphasized that the qualification assessment procedure is a single proceeding, and the HQCJ’s decision is of a recommendatory nature for the HCJ, which makes the final decision. In addition, the Supreme Court’s consideration of the case before the HCJ’s decision may negate the HCJ’s powers, since the Supreme Court’s decision will have a prejudicial effect. The court also rejected the plaintiff’s arguments about the violation of his right to a fair trial, as he had the opportunity to review the case materials in his electronic account. The court also noted that the plaintiff did not challenge the members of the commission, although he had the right to do so.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the appeal and left the decision of the court of first instance unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 939\/1987\/23 dated 08\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The court dismissed the claim because the plaintiff did not provide sufficient evidence of cohabitation as one family with the testator for at least five years before his death, including shared living arrangements, joint household management, a common budget, and mutual rights and obligations. The court considered the testimony of witnesses from both sides but found it contradictory and insufficient to confirm family relations, especially considering that the plaintiff reached the age of majority while having parents. The court noted that providing driver services and assistance due to the testator’s deteriorating health did not indicate the existence of family relations between them. The court also took into account the lack of evidence of joint household management and a common budget.<\/p>\n Case No. 466\/4076\/23 dated 11\/26\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The court found that an employment relationship existed between the individual and LLC “Alan” for a certain period, based on evidence such as a bank statement confirming the applicant’s receipt of money transfers marked as a salary project of LLC “Alan,” as well as other evidence provided. The court took into account that although the employment contract was not concluded in writing and no entries were made in the employment record book, the actual admission to work and payment of wages indicated the existence of an employment relationship. The court noted that in labor relations, the presumption of the employer’s guilt applies, which LLC “Alan” did not refute. The court also rejected LLC “Alan’s” arguments that there was a dispute about the law between the parties, as the company did not provide proper evidence of this. The court emphasized that establishing the fact of employment is necessary for the applicant to exercise his labor rights, including making an entry in the employment record book and accruing insurance seniority.<\/p>\n The court decided to partially grant the individual’s application and established the fact of an employment relationship between him and LLC “Alan” for a specific period.<\/p>\n Case No. 754\/8504\/25 dated 12\/03\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The court of cassation established that the appellate court mistakenly returned the appeal, citing that it was not filed directly with the appellate court, but with the court of first instance. The Supreme Court noted that the plaintiff sent the appeal to the official email address of both the court of first instance and the Kyiv Court of Appeal, that is, PERSON_1 also filed the appeal directly with the court of appeal. The court emphasized that the appellate court did not pay attention to this, thereby violating the applicant’s right to appeal the court decision. The court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and sent the case back to the court of appeal for further consideration.<\/p>\n Case No. 990\/390\/25 dated 11\/27\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed with the decision of the court of first instance to leave the claim unconsidered, as the plaintiff missed the six-month deadline for appealing to the court, established by the CAS of Ukraine, and did not provide valid reasons for its renewal. The court noted that the Presidential Decree is an act of individual action, not a regulatory legal act, therefore the appeal period is six months from the day the person became aware or should have become aware of the violation of their rights. The court also emphasized that the official publication of the Decree presumes the person’s ability to know about the sanctions applied to them, and the absence of evidence of active steps taken to obtain information about the Decree indicates the plaintiff’s negligence. The court rejected the plaintiff’s arguments about limited access to information and the absence of notification of sanctions, as there is no obligation to notify of sanctions in any way other than official publication. The Grand Chamber referred to the established practice of the ECHR regarding compliance with the principle of legal certainty and the obligation of parties to take measures to protect their rights within the established deadlines.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the appeal, and the decision of the court of first instance remained unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 990SCGC\/26\/25 dated 11\/27\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court granted the judge’s complaint, stating that the HCJ took a formal approach to assessing the reasons for missing the deadline for appealing the decision of the Disciplinary Chamber. The court emphasized that the HCJ should have taken into account all the circumstances, in particular, the HCJ’s own violation of the three-day deadline for sending a copy of the decision to the judge, the judge’s vacation, the significant workload on the judge during the appeal period, the need to obtain case materials to prepare a well-founded complaint, as well as the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding ensuring the right to a fair trial. The court noted that the possibility of appealing the decision 3. The court overturned the decision of the High Council of Justice and satisfied the judge’s complaint.<\/p>\n Case No. 902\/388\/18 dated 03\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. In this case, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court considered a cassation appeal regarding the replacement of the debtor in enforcement proceedings, where LLC “Financial Company “Yu-Base” requested to replace PE “Feride Plaza” with PE “Istvin” as its successor, since PE “Istvin” acquired ownership of the unfinished construction object, which was the subject of the mortgage. The court of appeal satisfied the application, considering that, according to Article 23 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage”, when the ownership of the subject of the mortgage is transferred, the mortgage remains valid, and the new owner acquires the status of the mortgagor. PE “Istvin”, being a third party in the case, knew about the encumbrance of the property by the mortgage and about the court dispute, but did not inform the court about the acquisition of ownership. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court emphasized that the claims for foreclosure on the subject of the mortgage are considered as actio in rem (an action against the thing), and the mortgage encumbrance is inextricably linked to the subject of the encumbrance, and not to the person of the mortgagor. The court also noted that PE “Istvin” acted in bad faith by not informing the court about the acquisition of ownership of the subject of the mortgage during the consideration of the case on the merits, which affected the court’s ability to take this into account when making a decision.<\/p>\n 3. The court dismissed the cassation appeal of PE “Istvin”, and left the decision of the appellate court on the replacement of the debtor unchanged.<\/p>\n Case No. 910\/21974\/21 dated 04\/12\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The court justified its decision by the fact that, according to the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, expenses for professional legal assistance are reimbursed to the party in whose favor the decision is made. The court took into account the provided evidence, in particular, the contract for the provision of legal assistance, the annex to it regarding the cost of services, and the act of completed works. The court also referred to the practice of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, which indicates that the amount of the fee is determined by agreement between the lawyer and the client, and the court is not entitled to interfere in these legal relations, and also to the fact that the court’s failure to take into account the terms of the contract for the provision of legal assistance that The court decided to grant the application of the Servicing Cooperative “Housing and Construction Cooperative “Darnytsia-2” and recover from PERSON_1 in favor of the cooperative 2050 UAH for professional legal assistance expenses.<\/p>\n Case No. 371\/1316\/22 dated December 3, 2025<\/strong><\/a> The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling because the appellate court did not properly assess the arguments of the defender’s appeal regarding the inadmissibility of a number of pieces of evidence that formed the basis of the accusation, and also did not consider the defense’s arguments regarding the inconsistency of the first instance court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the case. The court of cassation stated that the appellate court limited itself to general formulations, did not provide its own substantiated arguments to refute the defender’s arguments, and did not conduct a full and comprehensive analysis of the evidence, which is a significant violation of the requirements of the criminal procedure law. Also, the appellate court did not assess the arguments regarding the failure of the court of first instance to examine a number of pieces of evidence.<\/p>\n The court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and ordered a new trial in the appellate court, choosing a preventive measure in the form of detention for the convicted person.<\/p>\n Case No. 754\/2174\/24 dated December 3, 2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Supreme Court granted the prosecutor’s cassation appeal, indicating that, according to the Criminal Procedure Code, the costs of engaging an expert are recovered from the accused only in the case of a guilty verdict or if the expert was engaged directly by the accused. Since in this case the court did not issue a guilty verdict, but applied coercive measures of an educational nature to the minor, and the initiator of the examination was the pre-trial investigation body, the costs of the examination should be attributed to the state. The court referred to the conclusion of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, which pointed to the need to resolve the issue of procedural costs in court decisions of various procedural forms. The court also took into account the conclusion of the joint chamber of the Criminal Court of Cassation of the Supreme Court that the recovery of procedural costs from the accused is possible only if there is an accusatory 3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous instances in the part of recovering procedural costs from the legal representative of the minor for engaging an expert and ordered these costs to be charged to the state.<\/p>\n Case No. 911\/918\/25 dated 12\/01\/2025<\/strong><\/a> When considering the application for the recovery of expenses for professional legal assistance, the court of cassation instance was guided by the principle of reimbursement of court costs to the party in whose favor the decision was made, as well as the criteria of proportionality, reasonableness, and proportionality of such expenses to the subject of the dispute, the complexity of the case, and the scope of services provided. The court took into account that the defendant filed an application for the allocation of expenses and provided evidence to confirm the incurred expenses within the established period. At the same time, the court noted that the costs of legal assistance should not be a way for the party to be unduly enriched, but should meet the criteria of reasonable necessity. Considering that the response to the cassation appeal partially duplicated the arguments presented in the previous instances, the court reduced the amount of expenses to be reimbursed, considering them excessive. However, the court agreed with the need to reimburse the costs of the lawyer’s participation in the court hearing, as such participation involves preparation and direct participation in the hearing.<\/p>\n The court partially granted the application of Norma Plus LLC and ordered the Operator of the Gas Transportation System of Ukraine LLC to pay UAH 18,000.00 for professional legal assistance in the court of cassation instance.<\/p>\n Case No. 552\/4981\/18 dated 12\/03\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The appellate court overturned the acquittal verdict of the court of first instance and found PERSON_7 guilty, motivating this by the fact that the court of first instance mistakenly assessed the evidence. The appellate court decided that PERSON_7, being an official, entered false information into the protocols of the scene examination. The Supreme Court disagreed with this decision, pointing out that the appellate court, when changing the assessment of evidence, should have directly questioned the witnesses whose testimonies were key to the acquittal of PERSON_7 by the court of first instance. The Supreme Court emphasized that the appellate court did not ensure the completeness of the examination of the evidence, as it did not question the witnesses, although it made attempts to summon them, but limited itself only to listening to their previous testimonies. Also, the Supreme Court emphasized that the appellate court did not properly refute the conclusions of the court of first 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s verdict and ordered a new trial in the appellate instance.<\/p>\n Case No. 361\/2887\/19 dated 08\/27\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the land sale agreement as invalid, the recovery of the land plot from illegal possession, and the cancellation of decisions of state cadastral registrars and state registrars.<\/p>\n 2. The Supreme Court, in overturning the appellate court’s decision, stated that property rights are a constitutional right, and the owner does not lose them if the property has left their possession without their will and without legal grounds. The Court noted that the interference with the rights of ultimate acquirers is lawful, as it is aimed at protecting the plaintiff’s property rights, and the proportionality of the interference is ensured by the acquirers’ ability to claim damages from the culpable parties. The court also took into account the bad faith conduct of the defendants, who, knowing about the illegality of the land alienation, took actions to prevent its return, including dividing the land and transferring it to their son under a gift agreement. The court emphasized that the demolition of unauthorized construction on the plaintiff’s land is justified, as she did not consent to the construction, and the defendants knew about the illegality of their actions.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling in the part concerning the refusal to recover the land plots and the obligation to demolish the unauthorized construction, upholding the decision of the court of first instance, and left unchanged the appellate court’s ruling in the other part.<\/p>\n Case No. 761\/22150\/19-\u0446 dated 11\/19\/2025<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n 1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery from JSC CB “PrivatBank” in favor of the plaintiff of interest on bank deposit agreements that the plaintiff inherited after the death of her aunt.<\/p>\n 2. The court of cassation instance found that the appellate court did not take into account that the plaintiff had applied to the bank with a request for payment of the inherited funds, which is effectively a unilateral withdrawal from the bank deposit agreement, and from that moment the legal relationship between the parties terminates. The appellate court did not take into account that from the moment the plaintiff applied to the bank with a request for payment of the inherited funds, the plaintiff had the right to recover three percent per annum and inflationary losses, as provided for in the second part of Article 625 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, and not interest under the bank deposit agreement. Also, the court of cassation instance emphasized that the appellate court did not properly assess the instructions contained in the Supreme Court’s ruling of September 1, 2023, in particular, regarding whether the plaintiff’s claim to compel the bank to pay interest under the bank deposit agreement is an effective way of protection. The court of cassation instance noted that the establishment of the circumstances of the case, the examination and evaluation of evidence isthe prerogative of the courts of first and appellate instances, and it cannot interfere with the assessment of evidence.<\/p>\n 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s decision and remanded the case for a new trial to the appellate court.<\/p>\n Case No. 914\/768\/22 dated 12\/03\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court granted the prosecutor’s cassation appeal, overturning the appellate court’s decision and upholding the decision of the court of first instance. In fact, the court of cassation agreed with the decision of the court of first instance to recover a participation fee from Atrium Estate LLC in favor of the Lviv City Council. The appellate court erroneously overturned the decision of the court of first instance. The court of cassation decided that the court of first instance made a lawful and well-founded decision.<\/p>\n 3. The court decided to grant the cassation appeal, overturn the appellate court’s decision, and uphold the decision of the court of first instance, recovering court fees from Atrium Estate LLC in favor of the prosecutor’s office.<\/p>\n Case No. 735\/1057\/24 dated 12\/08\/2025<\/strong><\/a> The Supreme Court partially granted the prosecutor’s cassation appeal, overturning the appellate court’s ruling and ordering a new trial in the appellate instance, while releasing PERSON_6 from the correctional center. Unfortunately, it is impossible to determine the specific arguments of the court of cassation that guided it in making the decision from the provided operative part. A full analysis requires the full text of the decision, which will state the reasons for overturning the appellate court’s decision. Without the full text, it is impossible to understand whether there were violations of substantive or procedural law that became the basis for overturning the appellate court’s ruling.<\/p>\n The court overturned the ruling of the Chernihiv Court of Appeal dated July 14, 2025, regarding PERSON_6 and ordered a new trial in the court of appellate instance.<\/p>\n Case No. 451\/1745\/21 dated 08\/20\/2025<\/strong><\/a> 2. The court of cassation found that the appellate court mistakenly identified an improper defendant on the claim for recovery of average earnings, believing that the education department makes the salary payment. 3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling in the part refusing to recover average earnings and the additional ruling on the distribution of legal aid costs, sending the case for a new trial to the appellate court.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the decision of the Pension Fund to refuse the assignment of a pension and the obligation to credit certain periods of work to the insurance record.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal by an individual entrepreneur against tax assessment notices and claims for payment of debt on taxes and fees, as well as penalties.<\/p>\n
\nregarding the registration of tax invoices, the registration of which was suspended. The court emphasized that penalties cannot be applied until a decision is made to restore the registration of such invoices.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the obligation of the Romny City Council to accept an anti-radiation shelter into communal ownership.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the termination of a mortgage agreement concluded to secure a loan agreement, due to an increase in the interest rate on the loan without the consent of the mortgagor.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is a claim for the deprivation of parental rights of the mother in relation to her two minor children.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal of the decision of the High Qualification Commission of Judges of Ukraine (HQCJ) regarding the judge’s unsuitability for the position held.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of a person’s permanent residence with the testator as one family foregarding the right to inheritance.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of an individual’s employment relationship with a limited liability company.<\/p>\n
\nSubject of the dispute – appealing the appellate court’s ruling on the return of the appeal to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n
\nis an integral part of the right to a fair trial, provided for in Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Considering that the appellate court committed violations of procedural law, which led to an incorrect resolution of the issue of returning the appeal, the Supreme Court concluded that the appealed court decision must be overturned.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal by an individual against the Decree of the President of Ukraine on the enactment of the NSDC decision regarding the application of personal sanctions against them.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal by a judge against the ruling of the High Council of Justice on the refusal to renew the term for appealing the decision of the Disciplinary Chamber of the HCJ on bringing her to disciplinary responsibility.<\/p>\n
\ndisciplinary body is an important guarantee of judicial independence, and the HJC is obliged to take this into account. The Grand Chamber emphasized that strict application of deadlines without considering the specific circumstances of the case may be disproportionate and impede access to justice. The court also took into account that the judge took active steps to exercise her right to appeal, which confirms the validity of the reasons for missing the deadline.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the replacement of the debtor in the enforcement proceedings regarding the foreclosure on the subject of the mortgage.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the recovery of expenses for professional legal assistance from PERSON_1 in favor of the Servicing Cooperative “Housing and Construction Cooperative “Darnytsia-2”.<\/p>\n
\ndoes not comply with the principle of freedom of contract regarding the method of calculating the fee. It is important that the plaintiff did not file a motion to reduce the amount of court costs, so the court decided to grant the cooperative’s application for the recovery of legal aid expenses.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the appeal of the appellate court’s ruling upholding the verdict of conviction for violation of traffic regulations, resulting in the death of victims.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the legality of recovering procedural costs from the legal representative of a minor for engaging an expert in criminal proceedings where coercive measures of an educational nature were applied to the minor.<\/p>\n
\nof the verdict, documentary evidence of expenses, and the engagement of the expert specifically by the defense.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the recovery of expenses for professional legal assistance incurred by the defendant in connection with the consideration of the case in the court of cassation instance.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the appeal against the appellate court’s verdict, by which PERSON_7 was found guilty of official forgery (Part 1 of Article 366 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).<\/p>\n
\ninstance regarding the failure to prove the guilt of PERSON_7.<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recovery of a participation fee and a counterclaim for invalidation of the agreement.<\/p>\n
\nThe subject of the dispute is the prosecutor’s appeal against the appellate court’s ruling in criminal proceedings against PERSON_6 under Part 2 of Article 286-1 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (violation of traffic safety rules or operation of transport by persons driving vehicles while intoxicated).<\/p>\n
\n1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition as illegal of the order to suspend a teacher from work due to the lack of COVID-19 vaccination, reinstatement to work, and recovery of average earnings for the period of forced absence.<\/p>\n
\nrather than the gymnasium with which the plaintiff was in labor relations. The court of cassation emphasized that it is the employer with whom the employment contract is concluded who has the obligation to pay wages, referring to previous conclusions of the Supreme Court in similar cases. Since the appellate court did not investigate the circumstances of the case regarding the period of forced absence and the amount of average earnings, the Supreme Court cannot make a new decision. Therefore, the case was sent for a new trial to the appellate court to establish these circumstances and make a lawful decision. The additional ruling on the distribution of legal aid costs was also canceled due to the referral of the case for a new trial.<\/p>\n