{"id":8146,"date":"2025-04-10T11:05:00","date_gmt":"2025-04-10T08:05:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/04\/case-no-369-3999-22-dated-02-04-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-04-10T11:05:00","modified_gmt":"2025-04-10T08:05:00","slug":"case-no-369-3999-22-dated-02-04-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/04\/case-no-369-3999-22-dated-02-04-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 369\/3999\/22 dated 02\/04\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of the Dispute: Return of a land plot with an area of 0.25 hectares, partially located within the boundaries of a local significance forest reserve, in favor of the state.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<br \/>\n1. Part of the disputed land plot belongs to the lands of forestry purpose and is in permanent use by the state enterprise &#8220;Kyiv Forestry Enterprise&#8221;.<br \/>\n2. Dmytrivka Village Council did not have the authority to dispose of state-owned forestry land plots.<br \/>\n3. The court recognized that to resolve the dispute, it is necessary to precisely determine the area of land plot overlap, rather than return the entire plot.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: Revoke previous court decisions and refer the case for a new review to the appellate court to establish the exact area of land plot overlap.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/126362736\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of the Dispute: Return of a land plot with an area of 0.25 hectares, partially located within the boundaries of a local significance forest reserve, in favor of the state. Main Arguments of the Court: 1. Part of the disputed land plot belongs to the lands of forestry purpose and is in permanent use&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-8146","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\/8146","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=8146"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8146\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8146"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8146"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8146"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}