{"id":5575,"date":"2025-02-20T09:48:57","date_gmt":"2025-02-20T07:48:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/02\/case-no-320-42545-23-dated-13-02-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-02-20T09:48:57","modified_gmt":"2025-02-20T07:48:57","slug":"case-no-320-42545-23-dated-13-02-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/02\/case-no-320-42545-23-dated-13-02-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 320\/42545\/23 dated 13\/02\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Here is the translation:<\/p>\n<p>1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging disciplinary orders and dismissal of a police officer from service.<\/p>\n<p>2. Main Arguments of the Court:<br \/>\n&#8211; Legislation establishes a special 15-day period for appealing disciplinary penalties for police officers during martial law.<br \/>\n&#8211; The plaintiff missed the established period for appealing orders by applying to the court a month after receiving the orders.<br \/>\n&#8211; The court indicated that the special law (Disciplinary Statute) takes precedence over general procedural legislation.<br \/>\n&#8211; Previous instances incorrectly applied procedural norms regarding consideration of the application for term restoration.<\/p>\n<p>3. Court Decision: Rescind the decisions of previous instances and refer the case for new consideration to the court of first instance for further examination.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125173296\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here is the translation: 1. Subject of Dispute: Challenging disciplinary orders and dismissal of a police officer from service. 2. Main Arguments of the Court: &#8211; Legislation establishes a special 15-day period for appealing disciplinary penalties for police officers during martial law. &#8211; The plaintiff missed the established period for appealing orders by applying to&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-5575","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\/5575","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=5575"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5575\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5575"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5575"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5575"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}