Supreme Court Explained in what Cases Entrepreneurs Should Take Measures to Comply with Noise Standards in Accordance with Sanitary Norms

Sports equipment used in the activity of a sports club is a source of excess of the noise level established by sanitary norms, therefore, the premises where such equipment is placed shall be covered with the requirements to its owners (lessees) to take measures to prevent the formation and to reduce noise to the levels, established with sanitary norms.

This was underlined by the Supreme Court represented by a panel of judges of the Administrative Cassation Court after consideration of an administrative case upon the claim of an individual entrepreneur to the Department for Development of Consumer Market and Consumer Protection of Odesa City Council (Department) on the recognition as unlawful and cancellation of the prescription.

The essence of the dispute consisted of the fact that the plaintiff had applied to court with an administrative claim, asking to recognize as unlawful and to cancel a prescription, with which the defendant obliged him (plaintiff) to provide project documentation as for decreasing the impact of noise load on environment. To justify his claim, the plaintiff noted that in his economic activity (the activity of the sports club) he did not apply sound reproducing equipment resulting in the excess of noise level established with sanitary norms; therefore, pursuant to current legislation, he was not obliged to develop project documentation as for decreasing the impact of noise load on environment.

While refusing to satisfy the administrative claim, courts of first and appeal instances remarked that the Department participated in the organization of the city land improvement, performed the measures of state supervision (control) as for revealing and prevention of legislative requirements by economic entities and performed self-control over the condition of the territory of land improvement facilities; thus it was authorized to issue the appealed prescription.

The Supreme Court upheld the judgments of courts of first and appeal instances taking into account the following.

On the grounds of analysis of provisions of the laws of Ukraine “On the Land Improvement in Populated Localities”, “On Local Self-Government in Ukraine”, the Rules on Land Improvement in Odesa approved with the Decision of Odesa City Council on 23 December 2011 No. 1631-VI, the panel of judges concluded that the self-governing control over the land improvement in Odesa shall be performed by means of holding examination of territories with the composition of protocols and prescriptions regarding persons violating the existing legislation; consideration of applications on behalf of enterprises, institutions, organizations and citizens.

The Court noted that functionaries of the Department were authorized to issue prescriptions on the elimination of violations of land improvement rules.

The Supreme Court also formed the legal position, pursuant to which in case of performing by enterprises, institutions, organizations and citizens the activity or application of sound reproducing equipment resulting in the excess of noise level established with sanitary norms, in such premises and on such territories they shall take measures to prevent the formation and to decrease noise till the level established with sanitary norms (they are also obliged to develop project documentation and to take measures on decreasing the impact of noise load on environment).

Resolution of the Supreme Court of 23 January 2020 in the case No. 522/20954/16-а (administrative proceedings No. К/9901/18523/18) – http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/87129313.