><V=B5@=V2AL:89 @09>==89 AC4 <.%0@:>20
@>20465==O 2/641/2509/2015 !?@020 641/9170/15-F
# %
30 6>2B=O 2015 @>:C ><V=B5@=V2AL:89 @09>==89 AC4 <VAB0 %0@:>20 C A:;04V:
3>;>2CNG>3> AC44V >340= ..,
70 CG0ABN A5:@5B0@O &N: ...,
@>73;O=C2H8 C 2V4:@8B><C AC4>2><C 70AV40==V 2 70;V AC4C 2 <. %0@:>2V 7CAB@VG=89 ?>7>2 !_1 4> !_2 ?@> 287=0==O ?@020 2;0A=>ABV 2 ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=><,-
2 A B 0 = > 2 8 2 :
>7820G !_2 725@=C2AO 4> ><V=B5@=V2AL:>3> @09>==>3> AC4C <. %0@:>20 7 ?>7>2>< 4> %0@:V2AL:>W <VAL:>W @048, 2 O:><C ?@>A8BL 287=0B8 70 ?>7820G5< ?@02> 2;0A=>ABV =0 1/2 G0AB8=C :20@B8@8, I> 7=0E>48BLAO 70 04@5A>N: !_1 2 ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=>< ?VA;O !_3, ?><5@;>W 05.01.2015 @>:C.
28.10.2015 @>:C 4> AC4C 7 7CAB@VG=8< ?>7>2>< 725@=C2AO !_1 4> !_2, 2 O:><C ?@>A8BL 287=0B8 70 =8< ?@02> 2;0A=>ABV =0 3/4 G0AB8=8 :20@B8@8, I> 7=0E>48BLAO 70 04@5A>N: !_1 2 ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=>< ?VA;O !_3, ?><5@;>W 05.01.2015 @>:C.
CAB@VG=89 ?>7>2 ?@>A82 >1*T4=0B8 2 >4=5 ?@>20465==O 7 ?5@2VA=8< ?>7>2><.
!C4, 28A;CE02H8 CG0A=8:V2 ?@>F5AC, 4>A;V482H8 <0B5@V0;8 A?@028, ?@8E>48BL 4> =0ABC?=>3>.
V4?>2V4=> 4> AB.123 & #:@0W=8 2V4?>2V40G <0T ?@02> ?@54*O28B8 7CAB@VG=89 ?>7>2 4> ?>G0B:C @>73;O4C A?@028 ?> ACBV. CAB@VG=89 ?>7>2 ?@89<0TBLAO 4> A?V;L=>3> @>73;O4C 7 ?5@2VA=8< ?>7>2><, O:I> >18420 ?>7>28 270T<>?>2*O70=V V A?V;L=89 WE @>73;O4 T 4>FV;L=8<, 7>:@5<0, :>;8 2>=8 28=8:0NBL 7 >4=8E ?@02>2V4=>A8=.
@0E>2CNG8, I> A?V;L=89 @>73;O4 F8E A?@02 T 4>FV;L=89, AC4 22060T 70 =5>1EV4=5 ?@89=OB8 4> A?V;L=>3> @>73;O4C 7 ?5@2VA=8< ?>7>2>< 7CAB@VG=89 ?>7>2 !_1 4> !_2 ?@> 287=0==O ?@020 2;0A=>ABV 2 ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=><.
5@CNG8AL AB. 123 & #:@0W=8, AC4, -
CE20;82:
CAB@VG=C ?>7>2=C 70O2C !_1 4> !_2 ?@> 287=0==O ?@020 2;0A=>ABV 2 ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=>< ?@89=OB8 4> A?V;L=>3> @>73;O4C 7 ?5@2VA=8< ?>7>2>< !_2 4> %0@:V2AL:>W <VAL:>W @048, B@5BO >A>10: !_1 ?@> 287=0==O ?@020 2;0A=>ABV =0 =5@CE><5 <09=> C ?>@O4:C A?04:C20==O 70 70:>=><, >1T4=02H8 WE 2 >4=5 ?@>20465==O.
#E20;0 >A:0@65==N =5 ?V4;O30T.
!C44O -!_4
The court decision No. 52992377, Slobidskyi District Court of Kharkiv City (until 25.04.2025 - Kominternivskyi District Court of Kharkiv City) was adopted on 30.10.2015. The procedural form is Civil, and the decision form is Court ruling. On this page, you will find useful data about this court decision. We provide convenient and quick access to actual court decisions so that you can keep up to date with the most recent court precedents. Our database covers the full range of information you need, allowing you to find useful data conveniently.
This decision relates to case No. 641/9170/15-ц. Firms, which are mentioned in the text of this judgment: