{"id":6533,"date":"2025-03-10T09:22:58","date_gmt":"2025-03-10T07:22:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-640-16646-21-dated-05-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-10T09:22:58","modified_gmt":"2025-03-10T07:22:58","slug":"case-no-640-16646-21-dated-05-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-640-16646-21-dated-05-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 640\/16646\/21 dated 05\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Return of an Administrative Fine Paid Based on a Court Order Subsequently Cancelled by the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<br \/>\n1. The institution of reversal of court decision execution, provided for in Article 380 of the Administrative Procedure Code of Ukraine, cannot be applied to orders imposing a fine under Article 149 of the Administrative Procedure Code of Ukraine.<br \/>\n2. The Court refers to the legal position of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, which established that funds paid to the budget in execution of a cancelled fine order may be recovered through court proceedings under Article 1212 of the Civil Code of Ukraine.<br \/>\n3. At the time of fine payment, a legal basis for the payment existed, therefore the funds are not considered to have been paid in error.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: To leave the appeal without satisfaction, and the order of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal &#8211; unchanged.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125626289\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Return of an Administrative Fine Paid Based on a Court Order Subsequently Cancelled by the Supreme Court. Main Arguments of the Court: 1. The institution of reversal of court decision execution, provided for in Article 380 of the Administrative Procedure Code of Ukraine, cannot be applied to orders imposing a fine under&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-6533","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\/6533","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=6533"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6533\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6533"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6533"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6533"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}