{"id":7028,"date":"2025-03-20T09:38:18","date_gmt":"2025-03-20T07:38:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-681-1464-21-dated-11-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-20T09:38:18","modified_gmt":"2025-03-20T07:38:18","slug":"case-no-681-1464-21-dated-11-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-681-1464-21-dated-11-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 681\/1464\/21 dated 11\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of the Dispute: Reclaiming a land plot with an area of 1.87 hectares, which was illegally alienated from state ownership and transferred to private ownership.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<\/p>\n<p>1. The court established that the land plot was located within low-productive degraded lands of the state fund, which were subject to conservation through afforestation.<\/p>\n<p>2. A portion of the land plot with an area of 1.2564 hectares was reclaimed in favor of the Polonsk City Council, as it was illegally alienated from state ownership.<\/p>\n<p>3. Regarding the claims for cancellation of registration, the court considers that the vindication of the land plot is a more effective method of protecting the right than canceling registration records.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: To uphold the decisions of previous instances, rejecting the prosecutor&#8217;s cassation appeal in full.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125843169\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of the Dispute: Reclaiming a land plot with an area of 1.87 hectares, which was illegally alienated from state ownership and transferred to private ownership. Main Arguments of the Court: 1. The court established that the land plot was located within low-productive degraded lands of the state fund, which were subject to conservation through&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-7028","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\/7028","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=7028"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7028\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7028"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7028"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7028"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}