{"id":7006,"date":"2025-03-20T09:28:07","date_gmt":"2025-03-20T07:28:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-560-16432-23-dated-13-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-20T09:28:07","modified_gmt":"2025-03-20T07:28:07","slug":"case-no-560-16432-23-dated-13-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-560-16432-23-dated-13-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 560\/16432\/23 dated 13\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: A serviceman challenges the inaction of the State Border Guard Service regarding non-payment of additional compensation amounting to up to 30,000 hryvnias for October and November 2022.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court established a fundamentally important position that the courts of previous instances incorrectly applied Instruction No. 188 when assessing the serviceman&#8217;s right to additional compensation. Instead, they should have been guided by the order of the State Border Guard Service Administration dated July 30, 2022, No. 392\/0\/81-22-AG, which defined the mechanism for implementing Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers No. 168. The courts had to clarify specific circumstances: whether the serviceman performed official duties, whether he was on medical treatment, for what reasons, and under what conditions.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: To cancel previous court decisions and refer the case for a new review to the court of first instance for a detailed examination of all circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125825564\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: A serviceman challenges the inaction of the State Border Guard Service regarding non-payment of additional compensation amounting to up to 30,000 hryvnias for October and November 2022. Main Arguments of the Court: The Supreme Court established a fundamentally important position that the courts of previous instances incorrectly applied Instruction No. 188 when&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-7006","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\/7006","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=7006"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7006\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7006"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7006"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7006"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}