Any hidden interference with the operation of a gas meter that results in distortion of gas consumption accounting data is the responsibility of the consumer and constitutes grounds for charging him for unaccounted consumed gas – SC GC

A consumer who has signed an act of sealing a gas meter bears responsibility for its preservation. After any hidden interference by him or another person that leads to distortion of gas consumption accounting data, the consumer must be held liable by being charged for the unaccounted (additionally calculated) volume of natural gas.

These conclusions were made by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court.

In this case, JSC “OGS ‘Poltavagaz’” filed a lawsuit against a household consumer of natural gas to recover the cost of unaccounted natural gas volume that had been additionally charged due to the discovery of a foreign object resembling a magnet on the meter. The consumer filed a counterclaim seeking to declare unlawful and cancel the commission’s decision on the additional charge for the volume and cost of natural gas, as well as to recover moral damages.

The court of first instance, whose decision was upheld by the appellate court, refused to satisfy the original claim and partially granted the counterclaim due to the lack of evidence that it was the consumer who had unauthorizedly interfered with the metering device in a way that caused incorrect recording of consumed natural gas (understating its readings).

When considering this case, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court noted that the legal relations between the Gas Distribution System Operator (DSO) and the consumer are clearly regulated by the Gas Distribution System Code (GDS Code). Any unauthorized interference with the operation of a measuring instrument / gas meter by the consumer entails the consequences provided for by this Code.

Having analyzed the provisions of the GDS Code, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court concluded that after detecting interference with the measuring instrument / gas meter and after carrying out the procedural steps provided directly by the GDS Code — including the consumer’s obligation under the terms of the standard contract and this Code to properly use and preserve the measuring instrument / gas meter — the DSO has the right to charge the consumer for the debt resulting from the interference carried out by the consumer or another person, for the period directly stipulated by the GDS Code.

Any distortion of gas accounting data caused by unauthorized interference with the operation of a gas meter / measuring instrument, after the DSO has carried out all the necessary procedural steps to prove such interference, constitutes grounds for charging the consumer for the unaccounted volume of consumed gas for the relevant period and in accordance with the nature of the interference that occurred.

Thus, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court confirmed the legal position previously formed by the Supreme Court that any third-party interference with a measuring instrument / gas meter that results in distortion of data is the responsibility of the consumer to whom the measuring instrument / gas meter was transferred for safekeeping. Accordingly, the consumer may be charged for the cost of unaccounted consumed gas. Any other interpretation of the provisions of the GDS Code has no legal merit. Therefore, it is not necessary to prove all the elements of this violation (the act, the method, and the consequences).

Taking the above into account, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous court instances and adopted a new decision to satisfy the original claim of JSC “OGS ‘Poltavagaz’” and to dismiss the consumer’s counterclaim. The Court pointed out that the lower courts had violated the requirements of the GDS Code and had failed to provide a proper legal assessment of the consumer’s liability for any actions involving (hidden) interference with the measuring instrument / gas meter.

Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court dated 11 March 2026 in case No. 542/881/19 – https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/135083073.

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