Disputes over challenging decisions of public authorities regarding the development of land plots that give rise to civil rights and obligations of other persons are considered under civil procedure – SC CivCC JC

Regardless of the subject matter and grounds of the lawsuit, disputes challenging the decisions of state authorities and local self-government bodies (public authorities) regarding the development of land plots at the local level, as a result of the implementation of which civil rights and/or obligations arise for other persons or existed at the time of their adoption, are private law disputes and are subject to consideration under civil procedure.

Such conclusions were reached by the Supreme Court as part of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court, ensuring the unity of case law.

In the case under review, the plaintiffs challenged the orders of the Head of the Regional Military Administration (RMA), which approved land management projects and changed the designated purpose of the land plot, alleging that the construction of a multi-apartment residential complex, for which the land plot was allocated by the contested orders, violates their right to an environment safe for life and health, respect for private life, and a proper living environment, guaranteed by Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

In terminating the proceedings in the case regarding the plaintiffs' claims to recognize as unlawful and cancel the orders of the Head of the RMA, as well as to cancel the urban planning conditions and restrictions for the design of the construction object, the court of first instance, whose conclusion was upheld by the court of appeal, proceeded from the premise that the plaintiffs have the right to file this lawsuit in accordance with the procedure provided for by the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, since they sought protection of the rights of an indefinite circle of persons to a safe living environment and a safe environment, which, in turn, excludes the private-law nature of the dispute between the parties.

Reversing the judicial decisions and remanding the case to the court of first instance for further consideration, the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court reached the following legal conclusion.

Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, which will decide the dispute regarding their civil rights and obligations (Art. 6 of the Convention).

The jurisdiction of a dispute depends on the nature of the disputed legal relations, the legal status of the applicant, and the subject matter of the claims.

The Joint Chamber concluded that the courts of lower instances failed to take into account that the plaintiffs were not the applicants for the adoption of decisions approving urban planning conditions and restrictions for the design of the construction object. In making such decisions, the defendant, as a public authority, did not directly exercise public administrative functions regarding the plaintiffs; therefore, they are not participants in the public law relations that arose as a result of the adoption of the contested decisions.

In such cases, the claim to recognize a decision as unlawful may be considered as a method of protecting a violated civil right under Art. 16 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, since the actual basis and purpose of filing such a claim is to contest the civil right of a person that arose as a result of the implementation of the decision of the public authority or existed at the time of its adoption.

The Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court noted that a dispute between a public authority and a subject of private law – a natural or legal person – in which the administrative actions of the public authority are aimed at the emergence, modification, or termination of the civil rights of a natural or legal person, is not a public law dispute. In such a case, it is a dispute over a civil right, despite the participation of a public law entity, and the disputed legal relations are regulated by the norms of civil and administrative law.

Resolution of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court dated 02 February 2026 in case No. 308/17484/23 (proceedings No. 61-8165сво24) – https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/134085452.

This and other legal conclusions of the Supreme Court can be found in the Database of Legal Positions of the Supreme Court – https://lpd.court.gov.ua.