{"id":7192,"date":"2025-03-23T09:17:50","date_gmt":"2025-03-23T07:17:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/03\/case-no-923-60-19-dated-19-02-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-03-23T09:17:50","modified_gmt":"2025-03-23T07:17:50","slug":"case-no-923-60-19-dated-19-02-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/03\/case-no-923-60-19-dated-19-02-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 923\/60\/19 dated 19\/02\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

1. Subject of Dispute: The prosecutor challenged the decision of the Kherson City Council regarding the transfer of a land plot to LLC “VLADI-MYR PLUS” and the lease agreement for this land plot.<\/p>\n

2. Main Arguments of the Court:
\n– Declaring the council’s decision invalid, which has already been executed (lease agreement signed), is not an effective method of protection.
\n– The prosecutor did not file claims for the return of the land plot, therefore the chosen method of protection will not lead to the restoration of the territorial community’s rights.
\n– The lease agreement was concluded with violations of land legislation, but without a claim for its return, the lawsuit is ineffective.<\/p>\n

3. Court Decision: Deny the prosecutor’s claim due to the ineffectiveness of the chosen methods of protection.<\/p>\n

Note: The court emphasized that the prosecutor is not deprived of the right to file a new lawsuit by choosing an appropriate and effective method of protecting violated rights.<\/p>\n

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

Here is the translation: 1. Subject of Dispute: The prosecutor challenged the decision of the Kherson City Council regarding the transfer of a land plot to LLC “VLADI-MYR PLUS” and the lease agreement for this land plot. 2. Main Arguments of the Court: – Declaring the council’s decision invalid, which has already been executed (lease…<\/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-7192","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\/7192","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=7192"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7192\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7192"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7192"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7192"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}