{"id":8184,"date":"2025-04-11T10:34:59","date_gmt":"2025-04-11T07:34:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/04\/case-no-620-14727-23-dated-april-3-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-04-11T10:34:59","modified_gmt":"2025-04-11T07:34:59","slug":"case-no-620-14727-23-dated-april-3-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/04\/case-no-620-14727-23-dated-april-3-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 620\/14727\/23 dated April 3, 2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>1. The subject of the dispute is the obligation of the Central Department of the State \u0438\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u043d\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u0441\u043b\u0443\u0436\u0431\u044b to remove the \u0430\u0440\u0435\u0448\u0442 from the \u043d\u0435\u0440\u0443\u0445\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430 of an individual, imposed within the framework of the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f on the basis of the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0443 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0443\u0441\u0430.<\/p>\n<p>2. The courts of previous instances closed the \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f, considering that the \u0441\u043f\u0456\u0440 is not \u043f\u0443\u0431\u043b\u0456\u0447\u043d\u043e-\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u043e\u0432\u0438\u043c, since it concerns the \u0437\u0430\u0445\u0438\u0441\u0442\u0443 of the civil rights of the \u043f\u043e\u0437\u0438\u0432\u0430\u0447\u0430 regarding the \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430 \u043e\u0431\u0442\u044f\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0430\u0440\u0435\u0448\u0442\u043e\u043c, and should be considered in the order of civil \u0441\u0443\u0434\u043e\u0447\u0438\u043d\u0441\u0442\u0432\u0430, referring to the practice of the Great Chamber of the \u0412\u0435\u0440\u0445\u043e\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0421\u0443\u0434\u0443 regarding the \u043f\u043e\u0437\u043e\u0432\u0456\u0432 \u043f\u0440\u043e \u0437\u043d\u044f\u0442\u0442\u044f \u0430\u0440\u0435\u0448\u0442\u0443 \u0437 \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430, that \u0491\u0440\u0443\u043d\u0442\u0443\u044e\u0442\u044c\u0441\u044f on the right of \u0432\u043b\u0430\u0441\u043d\u043e\u0441\u0442\u0456. The \u0412\u0435\u0440\u0445\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0421\u0443\u0434 did not agree with this, indicating that the \u044e\u0440\u0438\u0441\u0434\u0438\u043a\u0446\u0456\u044f depends on the type of \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442\u0430: if the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u0438\u0439 \u0434\u043e\u043a\u0443\u043c\u0435\u043d\u0442 is issued not by the \u0441\u0443\u0434 (for example, \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u0438\u0439 \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0443\u0441\u0430), the \u0441\u043f\u0456\u0440 regarding the actions of the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0457 \u0441\u043b\u0443\u0436\u0431\u0438 is subject to \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434\u0443 in the \u0430\u0434\u043c\u0456\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0456. The \u0412\u0435\u0440\u0445\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0421\u0443\u0434 noted that the \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043c\u043e\u0432\u0430 of the \u0434\u0435\u0440\u0436\u0430\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0446\u044f to \u0437\u043d\u044f\u0442\u0438 \u0430\u0440\u0435\u0448\u0442 \u0437 \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430 of the \u0431\u043e\u0440\u0436\u043d\u0438\u043a\u0430 in the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u043c\u0443 \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u0456, \u0432\u0456\u0434\u043a\u0440\u0438\u0442\u043e\u043c\u0443 from the \u043f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0443\u0441\u043e\u0432\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0443 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0443\u0441\u0430, can be \u043e\u0441\u043a\u0430\u0440\u0436\u0435\u043d\u0430 by the \u0431\u043e\u0440\u0436\u043d\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043c to the \u0430\u0434\u043c\u0456\u043d\u0456\u0441\u0442\u0440\u0430\u0442\u0438\u0432\u043d\u043e\u0433\u043e \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0443. The \u0412\u0435\u0440\u0445\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0421\u0443\u0434 \u0432\u0456\u0434\u0441\u0442\u0443\u043f\u0438\u0432 from the practice, on which the \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0438 of previous instances referred.<\/p>\n<p>3. The \u0412\u0435\u0440\u0445\u043e\u0432\u043d\u0438\u0439 \u0421\u0443\u0434 \u0441\u043a\u0430\u0441\u0443\u0432\u0430\u0432 the \u0440\u0456\u0448\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f of the \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0456\u0432 of previous instances and \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0438\u0432 the \u0441\u043f\u0440\u0430\u0432\u0443 to the \u0441\u0443\u0434\u0443 of the first instance for \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0434\u043e\u0432\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f \u0440\u043e\u0437\u0433\u043b\u044f\u0434\u0443.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/126346550\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>1. The subject of the dispute is the obligation of the Central Department of the State \u0438\u0441\u043f\u043e\u043b\u043d\u0438\u0442\u0435\u043b\u044c\u043d\u043e\u0439 \u0441\u043b\u0443\u0436\u0431\u044b to remove the \u0430\u0440\u0435\u0448\u0442 from the \u043d\u0435\u0440\u0443\u0445\u043e\u043c\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043c\u0430\u0439\u043d\u0430 of an individual, imposed within the framework of the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f on the basis of the \u0432\u0438\u043a\u043e\u043d\u0430\u0432\u0447\u043e\u0433\u043e \u043d\u0430\u043f\u0438\u0441\u0443 \u043d\u043e\u0442\u0430\u0440\u0456\u0443\u0441\u0430. 2. The courts of previous instances closed the \u043f\u0440\u043e\u0432\u0430\u0434\u0436\u0435\u043d\u043d\u044f, considering&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-8184","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\/8184","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=8184"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8184\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8184"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8184"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8184"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}