{"id":6455,"date":"2025-03-08T09:39:47","date_gmt":"2025-03-08T07:39:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-569-1720-24-dated-11-12-2024\/"},"modified":"2025-03-08T09:39:47","modified_gmt":"2025-03-08T07:39:47","slug":"case-no-569-1720-24-dated-11-12-2024","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-569-1720-24-dated-11-12-2024\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 569\/1720\/24 dated 11\/12\/2024"},"content":{"rendered":"

Here is the translation:<\/p>\n

Subject of Dispute: Challenging the Inaction of a Private Executor Regarding the Termination of Enforcement Proceedings for Credit Debt Recovery.<\/p>\n

Key Court Arguments:<\/p>\n

1. The guarantor argued that credit obligations were fully terminated due to the sale of the mortgage subject at a price exceeding the debt amount.<\/p>\n

2. The court indicated that in such a situation, the debtor must apply to the court with a request to recognize the writ of execution as non-enforceable, rather than challenge the executor’s actions.<\/p>\n

3. The court noted that the fact of foreclosure on the mortgage subject is not an unconditional basis for terminating the obligations under the credit agreement.<\/p>\n

Court Decision: To cancel the appellate court resolution and uphold the first instance court’s decision to reject the guarantor’s complaint against the private executor’s actions.<\/p>\n

Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Here is the translation: Subject of Dispute: Challenging the Inaction of a Private Executor Regarding the Termination of Enforcement Proceedings for Credit Debt Recovery. Key Court Arguments: 1. The guarantor argued that credit obligations were fully terminated due to the sale of the mortgage subject at a price exceeding the debt amount. 2. The court…<\/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-6455","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\/6455","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=6455"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6455\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6455"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6455"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6455"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}