Where are we    office@sw-partners.com +38(097) 946 65 81

СНПЧ А7 Омск, обзоры принтеров и МФУ


Case 1: Violation of the procedure of buying the vehicle: under the contract of sale the car does not always become the property

The Supreme Court explained what procedure should be followed during concluding the car sale-purchase agreement - judgment in case No. 145/145/17 dated January 22, 2019.

Case:  the plaintiff issued a power of attorney to dispose of the car to another person who sold it. Later she cancelled the power of attorney  and asked to reclaim her car from someone else's possession. The new owner stated that he is a bona fide purchaser of the property under the contract of sale.

The court of first instance dismissed the claim, noting that the attorney had all rights to dispose of the vehicle.

However, the appellate court upheld the claims on the grounds that when concluding the car sale-purchase agreement, the parties did not adhere to the established procedure, and the new owner received the property in the order of transfer.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine  agreed with the decision of the appellate instance, arguing that, according to paragraph 1 of the order of Cabinet of Ministers of November # 941, dated 18.11.2015, documents confirming  the legality of the acquisition of vehicles are documents executed directly in service centers of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in the presence of administrators (for purchase- sale agreements, exchange) , and others, on the basis of which the right of ownership of the vehicle is acquired (donation, heritage ets) .

This contract of sale of the car was concluded between the parties in simple written form, not in the service center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and without the presence of the administrator. Since the parties did not adhere to the established procedure, such  contract is not concluded.


Case 2: Who is responsible for slippery roads?

The Supreme Court in Resolution No. 465/11817/13-c dated 10.24.2018 clarified that their owners are responsible for safe traffic conditions.

The plaintiff asked to recover the material and moral damage caused by the accident due to the poor condition of the road. The lawsuit is motivated by the fact that the road service, as well as the enterprise with which the agreement on the maintenance of the relevant road was concluded, did not treat it with an anti-icing (deicing) agent.

The courts of all three instances satisfied the claim.

According to Part 1 of Art. 24 of the Law "On Road Traffic" owners of roads carry the responsibility for creating safe traffic conditions on roads, streets and railroad crossings.

The owner of the road on which the accident occurred, Ukravtodor (the service of motor roads of the region). However, it signed a contract with the company for the repair and maintenance of this road.

The Supreme Court indicated that in this case the enterprise is liable for compensation for the damage to the victims of the accident, if it occurred due to the poor state of the road.


Case 3:  When overspeed  is fixed - check the validity of the registration of the speed-measure equipment in the State Register of measuring instruments, lists of types of measuring instruments, standard samples of the composition and properties of substances and materials

The act (postanova) on administrative liability for overspeeding a vehicle, which was fixed by a policeman with the TruCAM speed meter, was canceled, because the usage of a laser speed meter LTI 20/20 TruCAM, which is registered in the State Register of Measuring Instruments under No. U3197-12, is unlawful, due to the exclusion of this type of measuring equipment from the State Register by order of the Ministry of Economic development and trade of Ukraine №1362 from 02.11.2015.

Accordingly, when fixed the overspeeding with the appropriate device, it is necessary to check the availability of registration of this type of device in the state register of measuring-equipment:


court decision: http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/79232690?fbclid=IwAR2Aw7H1Wpfi1U2jtpKChGf9EcX2YVkKTkPMsh6x-zz5BgdhPXYw0EKoyRM

4. Cancellation of the Decision (Postanova) of bringing to administrative responsibility - the basis for the recovery of moral harm.

The essence of the case: After the court cancellation of the decision on bringing the plaintiff to administrative responsibility, the plaintiff went to court to seek compensation for moral damage.

Article 19 of the Law of Ukraine “About the National Police” stipulates that in the event of unlawful actions, the police bear criminal, administrative, civil and disciplinary responsibility in accordance with the law. The state in accordance with the law reimburses the harm caused to an individual or legal entity by decisions, actions or inaction of a police body or unit. Accordingly, according to Part 2 of Art. 1167 Civil Code of Ukraine, the defendant must compensate for moral damage caused to the plaintiff, regardless of the presence of guilt.

According to Art. 1174 of the Civil Code of Ukraine damage caused to an individual or legal entity by illegal decisions, actions or inaction of an official, or official, state authority, authority of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea or a local government in the exercise of its powers, is reimbursed by the state or a local authority self-government regardless of the guilt of that person.

The corresponding solution: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/78970057?fbclid=IwAR2ue5GSKa8OcYo7BYOP0TqdDWMcS7gQ42Rh-JZ-mVk_96-MVCvGzbtv4YM