{"id":5767,"date":"2025-02-24T09:15:10","date_gmt":"2025-02-24T07:15:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/02\/case-no-904-3016-23-dated-18-02-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-02-24T09:15:10","modified_gmt":"2025-02-24T07:15:10","slug":"case-no-904-3016-23-dated-18-02-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/02\/case-no-904-3016-23-dated-18-02-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 904\/3016\/23 dated 18\/02\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recovery of Debt under the Electricity Transmission Services Agreement and Accrual of Inflation Losses and 3% Per Annum.<\/p>\n<p>Main Court Arguments:<\/p>\n<p>The court established that the rules on exemption from liability due to force majeure do not extend to accessory monetary obligations, specifically the accrual of inflation losses and 3% per annum. Force majeure does not exempt from fulfilling the main monetary obligation, but only temporarily suspends liability for its non-performance. Despite the martial law, the defendant was obliged to continue making payments, and therefore, the accrual of inflation losses and interest is legitimate.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: The Supreme Court partially satisfied the cassation appeal, canceled the decisions of previous instances regarding the refusal to recover 3% per annum and inflation losses, and referred the case for a new review.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125291851\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recovery of Debt under the Electricity Transmission Services Agreement and Accrual of Inflation Losses and 3% Per Annum. Main Court Arguments: The court established that the rules on exemption from liability due to force majeure do not extend to accessory monetary obligations, specifically the accrual of inflation losses and 3% per annum.&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-5767","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\/5767","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=5767"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5767\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5767"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5767"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5767"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}