The Supreme Court returns the Tereshchenko estate to communal ownership

On 12 September 2023, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court delivered a new judgment in the case of the Tereshchenko estate, returning it to the Kyiv territorial community.

In 2007, the Main Administration of Communal Property of Kyiv (now the Kyiv City Department of Communal Property), PJSC Ukrnafta and the Municipal Enterprise "Directorate of Restoration and Renovation Works" entered into an investment agreement for the reconstruction and restoration of non-residential buildings - architectural monuments of local importance located at 34/15 Taras Shevchenko Boulevard, letter "A" and 34/13 Taras Shevchenko Boulevard, letters "Б", "В" (translator's note: сyrillic spelling of letters).

Later, pursuant to the agreement on substitution of the party to the obligation, all rights and obligations of PJSC Ukrnafta under this agreement were assumed by PrJSC Tsentrelevatormlynbud.

Subsequently, the parties entered into a supplemental agreement to the investment agreement concerning the possibility for the investor to acquire ownership of the said non-residential buildings. Later, the investment agreement was terminated on the basis of the relevant agreement signed by the parties, and in 2009, in accordance with the orders of the Main Administration of Communal Property of Kyiv, certificates were issued to certify the ownership of PrJSC Tsentrelevatormlynbud for the said buildings.

The prosecutor filed a lawsuit against PrJSC Tsentrelevatormlynbud and the Municipal Enterprise "Directorate of Restoration and Renovation Works" to terminate the investment agreement and return the estate to municipal ownership, claiming that the defendants had failed to fulfil their obligations, and that the local community had been largely deprived of what it had expected when concluding the agreement. In addition, the objects of cultural heritage were not removed from municipal ownership in accordance with the procedure established by law, since at the time the disputed legal relations arose there was a legal prohibition on their alienation. In addition, the defendants failed to comply with the requirements of the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Cultural Heritage" and the terms of the protection agreements, as the cultural heritage sites are in poor condition and no measures have been taken to preserve them.

The courts of previous instances dismissed the lawsuit.

Having considered the cassation appeal of the prosecutor, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court ruled to satisfy the claims for the return of the Tereshchenko estate to the Kyiv territorial community. In other respects, the decisions of the courts of previous instances were upheld.

In addition, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court issued a separate ruling to prevent violations of the legislation on the protection of cultural heritage.

The full text of the resolution of the Supreme Court in case No. 910/8413/21 (proceedings No. 12-9гс23) will be available in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions (USRCD) and in the Supreme Court Legal Position Database - lpd.court.gov.ua/login.