{"id":5424,"date":"2025-02-16T09:27:24","date_gmt":"2025-02-16T07:27:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/02\/case-no-640-456-20-dated-12-02-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-02-16T09:27:24","modified_gmt":"2025-02-16T07:27:24","slug":"case-no-640-456-20-dated-12-02-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/02\/case-no-640-456-20-dated-12-02-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 640\/456\/20 dated 12\/02\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Here is the translation of the legal text summary:<\/p>\n<p>1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging the decision of the personnel commission regarding unsuccessful certification of a prosecutor and the order of dismissal.<\/p>\n<p>2. Main Arguments of the Court:<br \/>\n&#8211; The personnel commission did not provide the plaintiff an opportunity to submit written explanations regarding the vehicle acquisition<br \/>\n&#8211; The commission&#8217;s decision on unsuccessful certification is based on unfounded assumptions<br \/>\n&#8211; The plaintiff provided evidence of the lawful vehicle acquisition<br \/>\n&#8211; The commission did not examine the documents submitted by the plaintiff<\/p>\n<p>3. Court Decision: Satisfy the claim, recognize the personnel commission&#8217;s decision and dismissal order as unlawful, reinstate the prosecutor in the position.<\/p>\n<p>Note: The court deviated from previous practice of considering cases on prosecutor certification, indicating the commission&#8217;s need to provide an opportunity to submit explanations.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125113199\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here is the translation of the legal text summary: 1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging the decision of the personnel commission regarding unsuccessful certification of a prosecutor and the order of dismissal. 2. Main Arguments of the Court: &#8211; The personnel commission did not provide the plaintiff an opportunity to submit written explanations regarding the vehicle&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-5424","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\/5424","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=5424"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5424\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5424"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5424"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5424"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}