ECONOMIC COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV, 01054, Kyiv, B. Khmelnitsky Str., 44-V, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

1. Kyiv

24.10.2022Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the City of Kyiv, in accordance with Articles 120-121 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, in the case of

on the claim of Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych

to Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych

on debt collection and eviction obligations.

REPORTS:

Individual entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych

as a defendant in the case

on the adjournment of the preparatory court hearing to 21/11/22 at 10:00 a.m. The hearing will be held in the premises of the Commercial Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, 44-B, hall number 22 .

Inform the defendant that based on the results of the court hearing, the court issued a ruling, which was recorded in the minutes of the court session, which set a deadline for the parties:

The plaintiff – until 04.11.2022 to provide the court with a response to the defendant’s response with evidence of sending answers to the parties to the case.

To the defendant – if available and necessary, until 16.11.2021 to provide the court with objections to the response to the recall, with evidence of their sending to the parties to the case.

The appearance of representatives of the parties to the case at the court hearing is not mandatory.

To recommend the parties to the case to participate in the court hearing by videoconference outside the court premises using their own technical means using the EasyCon program.

To explain to the parties to the case that the failure of any party to the case to appear at the court hearing, provided that he/she has been duly notified of the date, time and place of this hearing, does not prevent the consideration of the case on the merits, except for the cases provided for by Article 202 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “106902098” — YouControl

COMMERCIAL COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV 01054, Kyiv, str. B.Khmelnitsky, bud. 44-B, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

ON INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE

1. Kyiv

26.09.2022Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the City of Kyiv, composed of Judge Grekhova O.A., having considered the claim of the Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych ( ADDRESS_1 )

to Individual entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych ( ADDRESS_2 )

on debt collection and eviction obligations

INSTALLED:

Individual entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych filed a lawsuit with the Economic Court of Kyiv against Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych for debt collection and eviction obligation.

The claims are based on the defendant’s violation of obligations under the Lease Agreement No. 03/02/20 dated 03.02.2020 and the Sublease Agreement No. 03/02/20-1 dated 03.02.2020, in terms of settlements.

According to Part 1 of Art. 176 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, in the absence of grounds for leaving the statement of claim without action, returning the statement of claim or refusing to open proceedings, the court shall open proceedings in the case within five days from the date of receipt of the statement of claim or application for elimination of deficiencies submitted in the manner prescribed by Article 174 of this Code.

Having considered the materials of the statement of claim, the commercial court found them sufficient to accept the statement of claim for consideration, to open proceedings in the case and to consider the case according to the rules of general claim proceedings, since the case is complex in view of the materials available in it.

Guided by Art. 120, 176, 234 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Commercial Court of Kyiv

RULED:

1. 1. Accept the statement of claim for consideration and open proceedings in the case.
2. 2. To consider the case according to the rules of general claim proceedings.
3. The preparatory meeting is scheduled for24.10.22 at 10:40 a.m. The meeting will be held in the premises of the Commercial Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, 44-B, hall number 22.
4. 4. To warn the partiesto the case about the consequences of failure to appear at the court hearing in accordance with the requirements of Art. 202 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.
5. To oblige the plaintiff to provide the court with the originals of all documents on the merits of the dispute, attached to the statement of claim (for inspection).
6. Establish, in accordance with Art. 165 of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine, the defendant shall have a period of 15 days from the date of delivery of the ruling on the opening of proceedings in the case – to submit to the court: a substantiated written response to the statement of claim in the manner prescribed by Article 178 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, stating the reasons for the full or partial rejection of the plaintiff’s claims with reference to the current legislation; all written and electronic evidence (which can be delivered to the court), expert opinions and witness statements supporting the objections to the claim; evidence of sending the statement of defense with the documents attached to it to the address of the parties to the case.

A copy of the statement of defense and the documents attached to it to other parties to the case must be sent (provided) simultaneously with the sending (submission) of the statement of defense to the court.

7. To warn the defendantthat in case of failure to provide a response within the period established by the court without valid reasons, the court has the right to resolve the dispute on the basis of the available case materials (Part 2 of Article 178 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine). At the same time, if the evidence cannot be submitted together with the statement of defense for objective reasons, the defendant must notify the court in writing and indicate: evidence that cannot be submitted; reasons, of which the evidence cannot be submitted within the specified period; evidence confirming that the person has taken all actions depending on him/her aimed at obtaining this evidence (Parts 3, 4 of Article 80 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine).
8. 8. To warn the partiesto the trial that in case of evasion of the court’s requirements, they may be subject to measures of procedural coercion in the form of a fine provided for in Art. 135 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.
9. 9. All applications, petitions, objections shall be submitted to the court by 19.10.2022 in compliance with the requirements for the form and content of applications on procedural issues established by Article 170 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.
10. 10. To draw the attention of the parties to the case to the provisions of Art. Articles 74, 80, 81 of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine on the procedure for submitting evidence, the consequences of failure to submit it and evidence of sending it to other parties to the case, as well as on the procedure for requesting evidence.
11. To draw the attention of the parties to the case to the fact that copies of written evidence submitted must be drawn up in accordance with the requirements of Part 4 of Art. 91 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine and para. 5.27 of the Unified System of Organizational and Administrative Documentation (Requirements for the execution of documents DSTU 4163-2003).
12. 12. To inform the parties to the case that the information on the case under consideration is available on the official web portal of the judiciary of Ukraine on the Internet at the link: http://court.gov.ua/fair/ and on the information site at the link http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/.
13. 13. Inform the parties to the case that the court has the technical ability to ensure the right of the parties to the case to participate in the court hearing by videoconference outside the court premises.

The ruling comes into force on 26.09.2022 and is not subject to appeal.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “106421272” — YouControl

ECONOMIC COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV, 01054, Kyiv, B. Khmelnitsky Str., 44-V, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

1. Kyiv

21.11.2022Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the City of Kyiv, in accordance with Articles 120-121 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, in the case of

on the claim of Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych

to Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych

on debt collection and eviction obligations.

REPORTS:

Individual entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych

as a defendant in the case

on the adjournment of the preparatory court hearing on 12.12.22 at 11:40 a.m. The meeting will be held in the premises of the Commercial Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, 44-B, hall number 22 .

The appearance of representatives of the parties to the case at the court hearing is not mandatory.

To recommend the parties to the case to participate in the court hearing by videoconference outside the court premises using their own technical means using the EasyCon program.

To explain to the parties to the case that the failure of any party to the case to appear at the court hearing, provided that he/she has been duly notified of the date, time and place of this hearing, does not prevent the consideration of the case on the merits, except for the cases provided for by Article 202 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “107427877” — YouControl

ECONOMIC COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV, 01054, Kyiv, B. Khmelnitsky Str., 44-V, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

1. Kyiv

12.12.2022Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the City of Kyiv, in accordance with Articles 120-121 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, in the case of

on the claim of Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych

to Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych

on debt collection and eviction obligations.

REPORTS:

Individual entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych

as a defendant in the case

on the adjournment of the preparatory court hearing to 16.01.23 at 10:40 a.m. The hearing will be held in the premises of the Commercial Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, 44-B, hall number 22 .

The appearance of representatives of the parties to the case at the court hearing is not mandatory.

To recommend the parties to the case to participate in the court hearing by videoconference outside the court premises using their own technical means using the EasyCon program.

To explain to the parties to the case that the failure of any party to the case to appear at the court hearing, provided that he/she has been duly notified of the date, time and place of this hearing, does not prevent the consideration of the case on the merits, except for the cases provided for by Article 202 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “107801840” — YouControl

ECONOMIC COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV, 01054, Kyiv, B. Khmelnitsky Str., 44-V, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

1. Kyiv

16.01.2023Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the city of Kyiv , composed of Judge Grekhova O.A., with the participation of the secretary of the court session Koverga P.P., having considered the materials of the economic case in open court

on the claim of Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych

to Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych

on debt collection and eviction obligations.

with the participation of representatives of the parties: according to the minutes of the court session.

INSTALLED:

Individual entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych filed a lawsuit with the Economic Court of Kyiv against Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych for debt collection and eviction obligation.

The claims are based on the defendant’s violation of obligations under the Lease Agreement No. 03/02/20 dated 03.02.2020 and the Sublease Agreement No. 03/02/20-1 dated 03.02.2020, in terms of settlements.

By the decision of the Commercial Court of Kyiv dated 26.09.2022, the statement of claim was accepted for consideration, proceedings in the case were opened, it was decided to consider the case according to the rules of general claim proceedings and a preparatory court hearing was scheduled for 24.10.2022.

On 20.10.22, the defendant’s representative filed a response to the statement of claim.

At the court hearing on 24.10.22, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 21.11.2022, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 27.10.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed an application for familiarization with the case materials.

On 07.11.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed a response to the response.

On 18.11.2022, the defendant’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

At the court hearing on 21.11.22, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 12.12.2022, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 08.12.2022, the defendant’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

On 09.12.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed a petition to attach documents to the case file and an application to increase the amount of claims.

At the court hearing on 12.12.2022, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 16.01.2023, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 12.01.2023, the plaintiff’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

On 13.01.2023, the plaintiff’s representative filed a motion to attach documents to the case file.

Representatives of the parties did not appear at the court hearing on 16.01.2023.

From the content of Part 2 of Art. 183 of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Ukraine, the court shall postpone the preparatory hearing within the period of preparatory proceedings determined by this Code in the following cases: 1) determined by part two of Article 202 of this Code; 2) involvement of a third party in the case or entry into the case, replacement of an improper defendant, involvement of a co-defendant; 3) in other cases, when the issues specified in part two of Article 182 of this Code cannot be considered at this preparatory meeting.

Thus, according to Part 2 of Art. 202 of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Ukraine, the court shall postpone the consideration of the case at the court hearing within the period established by this Code on the following grounds: 1) failure to appear at the court hearing of a party to the case, in respect of whom there is no information about sending him a ruling with notification of the date, time and place of the court hearing; 2) the first failure to appear at the court hearing of a party to the case, who was notified of the date, time and place of the court hearing, if he reported the reasons for the absence, which the court recognized as valid; 3) occurrence of technical problems that make it impossible for a person to participate in a court hearing via videoconference, except for cases when, according to this Code, a court hearing can take place without the participation of such a person; 4) the need to request new evidence, if a party to the case has substantiated the impossibility of filing a relevant motion within the preparatory proceedings.

In case of adjournment of the preparatory meeting or announcement of a break, the preparatory meeting shall be continued from the stage at which the meeting was postponed or a break was announced (Part 7 of Article 183 of the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine).

In accordance with Art. 182, 183 of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine, in order to comply with the principles of economic justice, namely the equality of all participants before the law and the court and adversariality, in order to enable the parties to exercise their procedural rights and obligations, the preparatory hearing should be postponed.

Taking into account the above, guided by Articles 121, 182, 183, 234 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Commercial Court of Kyiv

RULED:

1. 1. Postpone the preparatory meeting to 06.02.23 at 10:40 a.m. The meeting will be held in the premises of the Commercial Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, 44-B, hall number 22 .
2. 2. Notify the parties to the case about the postponement of the preparatory meeting.
3. To recommend the parties to the case to participate in the court hearing by videoconference outside the court premises using their own technical means using the EasyCon program.

The ruling comes into force on 16.01.2023 and is not subject to appeal.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “108413024” — YouControl

ECONOMIC COURT OF THE CITY OF KYIV, 01054, Kyiv, B. Khmelnitsky Str., 44-V, tel. (044) 284-18-98, E-mail: inbox@ki.arbitr.gov.ua

RESOLUTION

1. Kyiv

06.02.2023Case No. 910/9466/22

The Commercial Court of the city of Kyiv, composed of Judge Grekhova O.A., with the participation of the secretary of the court session Koverga P.P., having considered the materials of the economic case in open court

on the claim of Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych

to Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych

on debt collection and eviction obligations.

Representatives of the parties to the trial: according to the minutes of the court session.

INSTALLED:

Individual entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych filed a lawsuit with the Economic Court of Kyiv against Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych for debt collection and eviction obligation.

The claims are based on the defendant’s violation of obligations under the Lease Agreement No. 03/02/20 dated 03.02.2020 and the Sublease Agreement No. 03/02/20-1 dated 03.02.2020, in terms of settlements.

By the decision of the Commercial Court of Kyiv dated 26.09.2022, the statement of claim was accepted for consideration, proceedings in the case were opened, it was decided to consider the case according to the rules of general claim proceedings and a preparatory court hearing was scheduled for 24.10.2022.

On 20.10.22, the defendant’s representative filed a response to the statement of claim.

At the court hearing on 24.10.22, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 21.11.2022, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 27.10.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed an application for familiarization with the case materials.

On 07.11.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed a response to the response.

On 18.11.2022, the defendant’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

At the court hearing on 21.11.22, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 12.12.2022, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 08.12.2022, the defendant’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

On 09.12.2022, the plaintiff’s representative filed a petition to attach documents to the case file and an application to increase the amount of claims.

At the court hearing on 12.12.2022, the plaintiff’s representative appeared, the defendant’s representative did not appear.

Based on the results of the court hearing, the court ruled to postpone the court hearing until 16.01.2023, which was recorded in the minutes of the court hearing.

On 12.01.2023, the plaintiff’s representative filed a motion to postpone the court hearing.

On 13.01.2023, the plaintiff’s representative filed a motion to attach documents to the case file.

Representatives of the parties did not appear at the court hearing on 16.01.2023.

By the decision of the Commercial Court of Kyiv dated 16.01.2023, the preparatory hearing was postponed to 06.02.2023.

On 03.02.2023, the plaintiff’s representative filed an application to leave the claim without consideration.

Representatives of the parties did not appear at the court hearing on 03.02.2023.

Having considered the plaintiff’s application to leave the claim without consideration and having examined the case materials, the court notes the following.

Paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Article 226 of the Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine provides that the court leaves the claim without consideration if the plaintiff filed an application to leave the claim without consideration before the start of consideration of the case on the merits.

According to the content of this provision of the current procedural law, the right of the plaintiff to file an application to leave the claim without consideration can be exercised only before the start of consideration of the case on the merits and is absolute, that is, it does not depend on the motives of the plaintiff’s application or the will of other parties to the case.

Therefore, since the plaintiff filed an application to leave the statement of claim without consideration before the start of consideration of the case on the merits, which is consistent with the provisions of Art. 226 of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Ukraine, the court concluded that the claim should be left without consideration, taking into account the application filed by the plaintiff.

Guided by Art. Century. 226, 234 of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine, the Commercial Court of Kyiv

RULED:

The claim of the Individual Entrepreneur Makarenko Vladyslav Mykolayovych against the Individual Entrepreneur Pysarenko Konstantin Vitaliyovych for debt collection and the obligation to evict to leave without consideration.

The ruling comes into force from the moment of its signing and may be appealed to the Northern Commercial Court of Appeal by filing an appeal within 10 days from the date of its entry into force.

Judge O.A. Grekhova

Court Document — “108789180” — YouControl

Scammers! They put up for sale my luxury house for a ridiculous amount of money, which is no longer for sale, to attract customers to their other properties! I found out about it by accident from my friends! Worst agency and service! Avoid it

T.H.E.CAPITAL Real Estate Agency Saperne Polje Street, 18 reviews (gorodwiki.ru)

They copied my advertisement, in response to the request to remove the constant lies that they would contact the right expert and remove it today or tomorrow. The price is not true. The realtor arrogantly demanded that the owner contact her. They have my phone number in their database. They can even arrange a viewing only through me. This is how real clients are driven away from your property, because when the realtor calls, they say that they are not cooperating. Even the owner called their office – the same reaction – zero reaction! After such agencies, the desire to cooperate with colleagues disappears altogether.
https://dom.ria.com/uk/agency-30696.html

80% of ads are fake, They deliberately serve false ads with a low price, just to get a call from a client. And if you ask which ad. Again, almost all of them!

T.H.E.CAPITAL Real Estate Agency Saperne Polje Street, 18 reviews (gorodwiki.ru)

I don’t like stained glass hour to write vidgukiv, ale, buvaje, taki yak T. H. E. Capital just zmushuyut ce robiti. Otzh, kozhen rieltor ts’oj agenta, kakomu tilky ne lin (a za їхni sword їх tam 200), піd privod navivnosti klієenta (kakogo naspravdi ne isnuje) bere i without permission to repost the nakoloshennya vlasnik about sales of non-reluctance, and potim iх navit vzhe ne tsikavit actualnost ogoloshennya: mozhlivo, tsina u ob’ekta zminilasya, mozhlivo, samo propositsiya vzhe neactualna, toshcho. Їм подаша долі взагалі вж не цікава! Golovne rozplodityti po usyým internetu ogoloshennya i zabuty. To vidhod, scho u nih duje bagato ogoloshen chi neactualni, chi mistat nedostovirnu informatiyu, i poki dobeshenya do pravdi, then mozhna i posiviti (I do not recommend!

T.H.E.CAPITAL Real Estate Agency Saperne Polje Street, 18 reviews (gorodwiki.ru)

T.H.E. Capital is taking over clients. I am a realtor, I offered cooperation to this company for commercial real estate. They took my photos, my property, and posted my premises online, which I offer for $3,500/month for $2,000, thereby intercepting the call traffic to themselves, working against my client, and during the viewing, the rental applicants they deceived were shocked , when we found out the real cost of rent. I do not recommend anyone to get involved with such colleagues.

Rubbish heap! I do not recommend this agency! The first call is excellent, a nice lady answers, writes down what you need and everything seems super until you get a call from a manager whose task is to sell you something and does not care at all that what he sends you does not correspond to your request at all. I changed 3 managers with all the same story! Do not recommend this agency!

T.H.E.CAPITAL Real Estate Agency Saperne Polje Street, 18 reviews (gorodwiki.ru)

I don’t know if the owners of the company read the reviews, but if they do, then you need to do something with your employees urgently. I left a request for the selection of commercial real estate in the amount of up to 1 million dollars. So no one even called back.

I will add to my review.
Several times I called on the ad and stumbled upon this NA.
It turns out that I, as a buyer, will have to pay them 5% of the cost of the property.
That is, they take % from both the seller and the buyer))
To the question of what exactly you will do, what service you will provide, what benefit for the buyer you will form for $ 20,000 (the cost of the object is $ 400 k$)
There is only one answer: these are our rules, this is how we work.
Sadness (

THE Capital, a real estate agency in Kyiv, operates under martial law (top20.ua)

They take a commission from both sides, live one day at a time and do not think about their reputation. Such people are called “ruffians” – the main thing is to pluck today and what the hell will happen tomorrow.

P.S. And don’t be fooled by the good reviews about this agency, they are written by the employees of this unfortunate company themselves.

T.H.E.CAPITAL Real Estate Agency Saperne Polje Street, 18 reviews (gorodwiki.ru)

I can’t speak for the entire T.H.E agency. CAPITAL, but there is a certain Alena in this agency, phone number 063-530-5648. This agent offers a room for rent. I’m calling. Alena replies that the hostess has a shift, she will agree on the keys and show everything. Then he calls back and schedules a meeting in 3-4 hours. Half an hour later he calls back and says that he needs to be there in an hour and a half. Since I don’t sit still, I explain that I won’t be able to arrive on time. We decide that her colleague will take the keys for the show at the right time, and we will connect later, in the late afternoon. That was the end of it. Alina no longer responded to calls or messages on Viber. I understand that there are all sorts of complications, I would even understand if someone was ahead of me and had already agreed on a lease. But why should I beg for information like alms and waste time??? Absolutely shameless and disregardful attitude towards the client.

https://dom.ria.com/uk/agency-30696.html

An employee of the company Nikolay Golovatsky The Capital looks like a very decent person, he wants to help and seems to help at first, advises, but then takes an advance payment from you and silently leaves, blocks you, does not answer your calls, leaves in English with your money forever. He also leaves the city and changes his surname. It happened to me, he took my son’s money and disappeared. Think before you buy anything from such a manager.

Non-Respiratory Agency Mykola Golovatskiy The Capital: Reviews about DIM.RIA – The First Independent Review Site in Ukraine (otzyvua.net)

These are reviews under the video clip http://surl.li/ksber  posted by Kostyantyn Pisarenko “the founder as he calls himself” and Sukhiashvili (Naboka) Maryna Teymurzanivna 05/03/1992 (general director) directly to THE CAPITAL does not belong to them, for example it is in THE CAPITAL head office, Kyiv, str. Sapernoe Pole 3, many companies are registered at this address and only one rents real estate, it is PP “AKULEATA ESTATE” / 36282872, the above-mentioned akuleata belongs to another company, Mashters, and Mashters, in turn, was already associated with Marina Naboka, so everything is confused and they belong to each other through the tenth knee.

@EKL1912

4 months ago

real estate websites are full of the Capital. Anyone can check it out. You take 10 objects that they advertise, call them with a request to show them, and at least 5 of them do not exist, but act as a lure for customers.

@diosgedon7402

1 year ago

A dishonest company, deceived on commission when selling a property in the Royal Towers. Usually I don’t write comments, but I accidentally stumbled upon a video picking up an object for purchase and could not pass by. Apparently, these are such frequent cases that you even have to record a video to justify it. There is no smoke without fire! I do not recommend anyone to deal with them!

@theUALPA

6 months ago

And what is it that you are presenting on the sales of the virus, the problem of obʼekti? Prichom shcho vas pro tse informut !

@lenkaguzey8790

1 year ago

Guys, the logo in the photo? This is for those who work without a contract! It’s better to sign a contract and play fair! And the specialists of your agency had no idea about the object, and had not been there even half a time… And the host’s photos are drawn out of net, but with your logo!  And DOM RIA is a shame! VERIFIED OBJECT!  Last week’s experience!

T.H.E. CAPITAL – We are for an honest real estate market in Kyiv |answers to realtors and Real Estate Agencies – YouTube

While Ukrainians with money or connections are enjoying life, “mere mortals” are being drafted into the army. While some Ukrainian businessmen donate to the army, volunteer, take an active part in the victory of Ukraine and boost the country’s economy, others go on vacation abroad and engage in fraud.

Konstantin Vitalievich Pisarenko, owner of The Capital, enjoys life without hesitation, which he shares with his subscribers on Facebook. Some publications are simply infuriating.

He quickly sent his business to Dubai and sends greetings to everyone from there:

https://www.facebook.com/pysarenko.k/posts/pfbid02Wk61EK27uKUv1TvSKyx4kTWikqTVSdWvttnstS6vVkQaFe3siyWbUcu8wefsHecGl?__cft__[0]=AZVP8n4rFdQXuWJ9syy5LKHwOHU2uzgD-ZmWEQ3 EGejZpKacnV6j_yuPOHYE0tgusHWa_i_Adr6wW1TpLtzmTcSTX0gNlpMokhVHX5SpgkODewWCwwuEb_yh3CUBQDg9wUTY240plVUuaLatlaQ7LwCRl3BFXx0qa24jB-FxPCSTd_etRVDCJ1qWWY_x NKnKRs0&__cft__[1]=AZVP8n4rFdQXuWJ9syy5LKHwOHU2uzgD-ZmWEQ3EGejZpKacnV6j_yuPOHYE0tgusHWa_i_Adr6wW1TpLtzmTcSTX0gNlpMokhVHX5SpgkODewWCwwuEb_yh3CUBQDg9 wUTY240plVUuaLatlaQ7LwCRl3BFXx0qa24jB-FxPCSTd_etRVDCJ1qWWY_xNKnKRs0&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R]-R

In the comments under the post he ridicules people who ask a natural question about his participation in the victory of Ukraine:

Next, he doesn’t hesitate to show off the footage of his life in Dubai:

https://www.facebook.com/pysarenko.k/posts/pfbid02sobsu9jKiaMNtw3f4ponuEzphsqe1Ksv46M2WUfRkstLyLjBLLopE2LowZjy9m2bl?__cft__[0]=AZXjhFJ_uU-SvVDvKmMewT-24Sj8jSKGL-Z6gBtcb NAJm0wtSqbANnAPjkVztb6NLKgsoVSIqN47LHxQGb0_ezjOnvaDnwp8LaP-WVuFYoNY-nS0RY9a_FWTrFbCc7ixE0vnXppiTpl5SB8q05Ow6OeWGcc3xfpo6Z5uFlZN2gBshkYKkHzybjp1dh EgXwttZAM&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Post dated March 25, 2023, in which Pisarenko, in a luxury car, with his assistant and his new phone, go to the Dubai Opera.

Posts on Instagram in which a businessman offers to invest in real estate in Dubai, instead of investing in Ukraine and the Armed Forces of Ukraine, are also a good indication of a luxurious life.

The topic of investment in real estate in Dubai is now the most discussed because… no one there is interested in the origin of capital. Unlike European countries, where financial monitoring is in place.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CpFZl0gDhCZ/

Interesting post dated February 25, 2023 about the lack of taxes in Dubai. It turns out that in Dubai you can work “white”, unlike Ukraine…

Also, all other publications of Mr. Pysarenko indicate that he fled to the UAE and is running his business there, calling for capital to be poured into the United Arab Emirates, and not into Fatherland.

After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, he continues to publish videos on Rutube

Taken from open source: Unique house on the water | A new format of suburban real estate | Project in Riviera Sunrise | – watch online video from Repair Historians in high quality and free duration PT28M1S (rutube.ru)

POLTAVA DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

RESOLUTION

on the termination of preparatory proceedings and

Appointment of the case for trial

September 07, 2015. PoltavaCase No 816/4188/15

Judge of the Poltava District Administrative Court Udovichenko S.O., in the course of preparatory proceedings in the case on the administrative claim of the Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava Oblast against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_2 on the collection of tax debt, –

V S T A N O V I V:

On September 03, 2015 the plaintiff Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava region filed a claim to the Poltava District Administrative Court against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_2 for recovery of tax debt in the amount of 7869.81 UAH.

By the decision of the Poltava District Administrative Court as of September 07, 2015, the proceedings in the case on this administrative claim were opened.

During the preparation of the case for trial, measures were taken for a comprehensive and objective consideration and resolution of the case: the defendant was invited to file objections to the claim, if any, and evidence in support of the objections, the facts that need to be established to resolve the dispute were determined, the parties were sent information explaining their procedural rights and obligations, the issue of the composition of persons who will participate in the case was clarified, as well as other issues necessary for the consideration of the case on the merits were resolved.

On the basis of the above, guided by Article 121 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, –

U X V A L I V:

To complete the preparatory proceedings in the case on the administrative claim of the Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava Oblast against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_2 for the collection of tax debt.

To appoint the case for trial in open court at the premises of the Poltava District Administrative Court at 16:00 on September 24, 2015 (at the address: 36039, Poltava, Pushkarivska Str., 9/26).

Summon the persons participating in the case to the court hearing.

A copy of the ruling shall be sent to the persons participating in the case.

The ruling is not subject to appeal and comes into force from the moment of its adoption.

Judge S.O. Udovichenko

Taken from open source: Court Document — “49771172” — YouControl

POLTAVA DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

RESOLUTION

On Initiation of Proceedings in an Administrative Case

September 07, 2015. PoltavaCase No 816/4188/15

Judge of the Poltava District Administrative Court Udovichenko S.O., having checked the materials of the administrative claim of the Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava Oblast against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_1 on the collection of tax debt, –

V S T A N O V I V:

On September 03, 2015 Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava region appealed to Poltava District Administrative Court with a statement of claim against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_1 for recovery of tax debt in the amount of 7869.81 UAH.

The administrative claim meets the requirements of Articles 105, 106 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine and is filed within the period established by law.

On the basis of the above, guided by Articles 106, 107, 165 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, –

U X V A L I V:

To open proceedings in administrative case No. 816/4188/15 on the claim of the Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava Oblast against an individual entrepreneur PERSON_1 for the recovery of tax debt.

To offer the defendant to submit to the court by September 18, 2015 written objections to the claim and the evidence in his possession.

To oblige the plaintiff to submit to the court by September 18, 2015:

– the defendant’s registration card as of the time of submission of the specified document to the court;

– evidence of sending tax assessment notices to the defendant,

– written explanations of whether the amount of the tax debt was interrupted (by repayment of the debt by the defendant) as of the time of filing a claim with the court;

– information on the defendant’s appeal against the requirement of form “F” dated November 03, 2014 No. 6521-25/913.

The case will be considered by a single judge.

A copy of the ruling shall be sent to the persons participating in the case, along with an extract on their procedural rights and obligations.

The ruling is not subject to appeal and comes into force from the moment of its adoption.

Judge S.O. Udovichenko

Taken from open source: Court Document — “49771247” — YouControl

POLTAVA DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

RESOLUTION

on leaving the statement of claim without consideration

September 24, 2015. PoltavaCase No 816/4188/15

Poltava District Administrative Court consisting of:

Presiding Judge Udovychenko S.O.,

Involving:

secretary of the court session Kyslychenko O.V.,

Having considered in open court the case on the administrative claim of the Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava Oblast against PERSON_1 on the collection of tax debt, –

V S T A N O V I V:

On 03 September 2015 Kremenchuk United State Tax Inspectorate of the Main Department of the State Fiscal Service in Poltava region filed a claim to Poltava District Administrative Court against PERSON_1 for recovery of tax debt.

By the rulings of the Poltava District Administrative Court as of September 07, 2015, the proceedings in the case were opened, the preparatory proceedings were completed and the case was appointed for trial.

On September 23, 2015, the court received the plaintiff’s motion to leave the statement of claim without consideration.

Taking into account the procedural rights vested in the plaintiff, the court regards the said statement of the plaintiff as a withdrawal of the statement of claim.

In accordance with paragraph 5 of part one of Article 155 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, the court by its ruling leaves the statement of claim without consideration if the plaintiff has filed a motion to withdraw the statement of claim.

Taking into account the unconditional right of the plaintiff to withdraw the statement of claim, the court concludes that the petition is satisfied.

Thus, the statement of claim shall be left without consideration.

On the basis of the above, guided by paragraph 5 of part one of Article 155, Articles 160, 165 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, –

U X V A L I V:

The statement of claim was left without consideration.

The ruling comes into force after the expiration of the term for filing an appeal, if such an appeal has not been filed. If an appeal is filed, the court decision, if it is not revoked, comes into force after the return of the appeal, the refusal to open appeal proceedings or the entry into force of the decision based on the results of the appeal proceedings.

The ruling may be appealed to the Kharkiv Administrative Court of Appeal through the Poltava District Administrative Court by filing an appeal within five days from the date of promulgation of the ruling with the simultaneous sending of its copy to the court of appeal. If the ruling was adopted in written proceedings or in accordance with part three of Article 160 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, or without summoning the person appealing against it, the appeal shall be filed within five days from the date of receipt of a copy of the ruling.

JudgeS.O. Udovichenko

Taken from open source: Court Document — “51547319” — YouControl

In 2014, a court case was opened under the category “Civil cases (until 01.01.2019) → Legal proceedings → Disputes arising from residential legal relations”, according to which the plaintiff on 06.23.2009 purchased from the defendant a plot of land for the construction of a residential building with an area of 0.0692 ha by ADDRESS_1. At the time of the conclusion of the contract of sale, the indicated plot of land was free of any buildings and structures. After the building was built and the claimant received the Declaration on the facility’s readiness for operation dated 11/25/2013, PERSON_4 applied to the registration service of the Kremenchug Municipal State University to register ownership of the newly constructed residential building, but by the decision of the state registrar No. 10809969 dated 02/11/2014, she this was refused, as the ownership of another house for PERSON_5 was registered at this address. The defendant refused to independently apply to the Registration Service for the termination of ownership of the destroyed house.

After the court ruled on the lawsuit regarding the termination of ownership rights to the plot already sold by Zhurba Olga Vasylivna and Zhurba Oleksiy Vitaliyovych to the plaintiff (who had already built a house on that plot), they filed an appeal, which was rejected.

Taken from open source: The result of the inspection: Zhurba O.V. (youcontrol.com.ua)

Taken from open source: Court Document — “39156471” — YouControl

Pisarenko is a professional fraudster and cheated me, he forced me to deceive my employees. He breaks all laws and is not afraid of prosecutors or senior officials of the state.

taken from open source: Reviews about T.H.E. CAPITAL Real Estate Agency – Real Estate – Kiev (zoon.com.ua)

T.H.E. CAPITAL does not pay money. You do all the work and then they leak it and take your work for themselves! The question is not for the entire company, but for specific people who need to be changed because more than one person has left! It took 5 a day

Taken from open source The capital – 65 reviews, photos, addresses, phone – Real Estate Agency – Saperne Pole Street, 3, Kyiv, 02000 | Ua.plaso.pro

Advantages

there is no

Flaws

Deceive the police officers. They throw pennies. At first, the paid internship is accepted, it seems that everything is ok, that you have completed the internship, and then suddenly everything changes and the company says goodbye to the candidate. When saying goodbye, they oblige to pay cash, celebrate with “breakfast”, and after a month they change their minds about paying. Fines in the office for everything. And how they deceive managers by selling non-rukhomost, HR managers do not say when hiring for a job about fines, about those that the candidate himself may pay for advertising, without having earned anything, visits to objects are not paid, managers say weekend The agency does a great job, they pay for advertising from real interns, and then they fire them. Since these managers have no connections, they won’t sell anything and will be out in a month. Recruitment of personnel is constant, the number of personnel is fixed. HR managers have plans for a number of interviews per day, for the number of candidates to start with, or to dismiss the candidate, and then, once the beginning is completed, they can get paid for advertising and say goodbye. This is the agency of “premium” hearing loss T.H.E. Capital.

I started an internship, they promised to pay for the internship, then they decided that I wasn’t suitable. Well, okay, that’s how it is. And since the last month has passed since I left the company, I haven’t picked up the money. She herself already wrote and sent a message that the stinks were determined not to cry. Super, the stinks were not crying. Why didn’t they tell me that I wouldn’t have to pay before I started my internship???? I didn’t intend to spend my time without costs, especially since I had a few jobs left in stock. And what the hell, I quit my job on the 1st day!!! I spent the first day of my internship talking, so why is my job to blame but bezkoshtovna.

A comment

lipen 2023 roku

Description of the specialist

The managers of the company or the HR department deceive you on your salary

Taken from open source : Reviews about T.H.E. CAPITAL Real Estate Agency – Real Estate – Kiev (zoon.com.ua)

Father Yulia Pisarenko/Olga Zhurbi’s man – Zhurba Oleksiy Vitaliyovych, born 03/03/1973, born in Kremenchuk, Poltava region, identification code – 2672510333 (from 17.0 3.1997 rock at the address: Poltava region, metro station Kremenchuk, vul. Irineeva, bld. 6, apt. 88). In 2019, the registration address was assigned to: Poltava region, metro station Kremenchuk, st. Shevchenka, bud. 55, apt. 38. Passport series KO No. 636796, issued by Avtozavodsky RV CMU MVS of Ukraine in the Poltava region, dated 01/17/2006. Water confirmation VХР046781 visible to territorial service center 8047 regional service center MBC near Kiev metro station dated 03/02/2017.

This is obviously information, Oleksiy Vitaliyovich of the Friendship on Zhurba Olzya Vasylivna, born 04/15/1973, (certificate about the ship No. 1516 dated 12/26/1992)). They are taking care of their sleeping daughter – Pisarenko (Zhurba) Yulia Oleksiivna, born 04/06/1993, (actual record about the people No. 541 dated 04/29/1993).

You can use the phone number +380675427293 (Viber, Telegram, Whatsapp).

May be the latest pages in social networks:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/bigmord .

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/zhurba_alekseii/ .

For obvious information, a TK has been registered in the name of Oleksii Vitaliyovich:

– passenger car “NISSAN PATHFINDER”, gray color, born 2013, no. ВІ8533ВТ. Registration date – 05/28/2013.

– passenger car “TOYOTA SEQUOIA”, gray color, born 2008, no. ВІ6553СІ. Registration date – 03/02/2017.

The authority has 4 apartments at the following addresses:

Odessa region, Odessa metro station, Fontanska road (Perekopskaya Division street), Budynok 153/16, apartment 13

Autonomous Republic of Crimea, metro station Simferopol, Lermontova street, Budynok 20, apartment 134

Poltava region, Kozelshchinsky district, village. Knishivka, Stepova street, budynok 8

metro Kiev, Bauman street, Budynok 25, apartment 68

Result of verification Zhurba O. V. (youcontrol.com.ua)

Olga Vasylivna Zhurba and Oleksiy Vitaliyovich Zhurba are the founders of the Center for Individual Development “Success”.

Website: SUCCESS – Center for Individual Development (yspeh.kiev.ua)

Contacts of the training center: Ukraine, Kiev, shopping center “Mega-City” Kharkov highway 19, 7th floor, office 7011, imouspeh@gmail.com , Tel: ‎+380 96 304 5736

Videos about the activities of the center:

Forum “Sektam.net”

“Center for Individual Development SUCCESS

Alexey and Olga Zhurba are the founders of the Center for Individual Development “SUCCESS” since 2006. We’ve been together for 23 years. We can confidently call ourselves people who have reinvented ourselves based on our values. More than 10,000 students from Ukraine, Russia, Europe and Central Asia have completed our programs. And we can say, based on the experience and results of our graduates – ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE! Circumstances and barriers WERE, ARE and WILL exist for all people.

We are ready to share practical experience in obtaining results, looking at all the circumstances. People who have completed our programs say one thing: “If I had known this earlier, I would have achieved everything I wanted!” It’s never too late to start over and change your life. Value your time. It’s only begining!!!”

“Honestly. I didn’t understand anything about what they teach in this center, no specifics, just general phrases. “I achieved everything I wanted.” And you can achieve anything, you can want anything. For example, fly into space.”

Center “Success” Zhurba Kyiv – “Discussion” – Forum Sektam.net

She went on an internship, they promised to pay for the internship, then they decided that I was not suitable for her. Well, that’s the case. And as a month passed after she left the company, she still did not receive the money. She already wrote and received a message that they decided not to pay. Great, they decided not to pay. Why wasn’t I told that I wouldn’t be paid before I started my internship? I wasn’t going to work for free, especially with several job offers lined up. And what is most important, I performed work tasks from the 1st day! And I conducted interviews from the 1st day of internship, so why should my work be free. There are even screens of promises to pay wages for days worked and screens of their refusal.

Taken from an open source: T.H.E. CAPITAL Real Estate Agency – reviews, photos, prices, phone number and address – Real estate – Kiev – Zoon.com.ua

Leader Pisarenko pretends to be a great manager, in fact a collective farm type. His essence is revealed when he drinks, the whole screen immediately falls away, and you can see who he really is. A cheap guy with a lot of credits. ***. The person is not even in touch with his head, he is not mentally balanced. He shouldn’t go to a course with his mother-in-law, where he forces a good half to go, but to a good psychiatrist. He relies only on top realtors, and lives on their commission. Now, if the top guys united and created their own agency, then he would immediately end up where he should be – at the bottom. Some have already gotten used to this crazy person because they make money. But nothing lasts forever.

Taken from open source: Reviews about T.H.E. CAPITAL Real Estate Agency – Real Estate – Kiev (zoon.com.ua)

Pysarenko Konstantin Vitalievich
(defendant)

756/11281/21 (7)

Civil cases (from 01.01.2019)

Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv

26.07.2021

List of court documents in the case:

05.08.2021 Case No. 756/11281/21

Case number: 756/11281/21

Case number 2/756/5540/21

RESOLUTION

On Initiation of Simplified Proceedings

On August 05, 2021, the judge of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv Belokonna I.V., having considered the materials of the statement of claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_2 for the recovery of alimony for the maintenance of children, –

INSTALLED:

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in civil proceedings, referring to the fact that they had two minor children from their marriage with the defendant. In this connection, she asked the court to collect from the defendant in her favor alimony for the maintenance of children in the amount of UAH 20,000. for each, monthly, starting from the date of filing this claim until the child reaches the age of majority.

In accordance with Part 4 of Art. 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, taking into account the value of the claim, the case may be classified as insignificant.

The statement of claim meets the requirements of Article 175 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine.

The court did not find any grounds established by the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine to leave the statement of claim without action, return the statement of claim, or refuse to open proceedings in a civil case.

In accordance with the requirements of Chapter 2 of Section I of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, the case is referred to the substantive, subjective, instance and territorial jurisdiction of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv.

This case is in accordance with paragraph 1 of part 6 of Art. 19, paragraph 1 of part 1 of Art. 274 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine is subject to consideration in simplified proceedings, since the dispute is insignificant.

Thus, the court considers it necessary to accept the statement of claim for consideration, open proceedings in the case and hold a court hearing with notification of the parties.

Taking into account the above, guided by Art. 19, 187, 274 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court, –

U X V A L I V :

To accept the statement of claim for consideration and open a simplified claim proceeding on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_2 for the recovery of alimony for the maintenance of children.

The case shall be considered in a simplified claim proceeding.

Schedule the first court hearing on October 20, 2021 at 11 a.m. 30 minutes. in the courtroom in the premises of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv at the address: Kyiv, st. Marshal Timoshenko, 2-E, room 22.

A copy of the ruling, a copy of the statement of claim and the documents attached to it shall be sent to the parties to the case.

To clarify that in accordance with Art. 49 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the plaintiff has the right to increase or decrease the amount of claims before the beginning of the first court hearing, if the case is considered under the simplified claim procedure. In a case considered under the rules of simplified claim proceedings, a change in the subject matter or grounds of the claim is allowed no later than five days before the beginning of the first court hearing in the case.

To determine for the defendant a fifteen-day period from the date of delivery of this ruling to file a response to the statement of claim. Within the specified period, the defendant has the right to send to the court a response to the statement of claim, which must meet the requirements of Art. 178 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, and all written and electronic evidence (which can be delivered to the court), expert opinions and witness statements confirming the objections to the claim.

According to Part 4 of Art. 178 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, simultaneously with sending (providing) the statement of defense to the court, the defendant is obliged to send a copy of the statement of defense and the documents attached to it to other parties to the case. If the defendant fails to provide a response within the period established by the court without valid reasons, the court decides the case on the basis of the available materials (Part 8 of Article 178 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine).

According to the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 193 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the defendant has the right to file a counterclaim within the period for filing a response.

To establish a five-day period for the plaintiff from the date of receipt of the response to submit a response to the response, which must meet the requirements of Parts 3-5 of Art. 178 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, a copy of which must be sent to other parties to the case simultaneously with the submission to the court.

To establish a five-day period for the defendant from the date of receipt of the response to the statement of defense to file an objection, which must meet the requirements of Parts 3-5 of Art. 178 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, a copy of which must be sent to other parties to the case simultaneously with the submission to the court.

Participants in the case can get information about the case at the web address: http:// p ourt.gov.ua/.

The ruling comes into force from the moment it is signed by the judge.

Judge I.V. Belokonna

28.10.2021 Case No. 756/11281/21

Unique No 756/11281/21

Proceedings No. 2/756/5540/21

R I S E N N I A

I M E N E M U C R A I N S

(introductory and operative parts)

October 28, 2021 Kyiv

Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv composed of:

Presiding Judge – Belokonna I.V.,

with the participation of the secretary – Mushketyk I.V.,

Having considered in an open court session in Kyiv in simplified proceedings a civil case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_2 on recovery of alimony for the maintenance of children, –

C S T A N O V I C:

Guided by the provisions of Art. 259, 268 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine,

W i r i w i v:

The claim is to be satisfied partially.

Collect monthly from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_1 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_1 ) in favor of PERSON_1 (address: ADDRESS_2 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_2 ) alimony in a fixed amount of money in the amount of UAH 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred) 00 kopecks for the maintenance of the son PERSON_3, INFORMATION_2, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the child reaches the age of majority.

Collect monthly from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_1 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_1 ) in favor of PERSON_1 (address: ADDRESS_2 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_2 ) alimony in a fixed amount of money in the amount of UAH 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred) 00 kopecks for the maintenance of the son PERSON_4, INFORMATION_3, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the child reaches the age of majority.

The rest of the claims are to be dismissed.

To collect from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_1 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_1 ) to the state budget the court fee in the amount of 908 (nine hundred and eight) hryvnias 00 kopecks.

The decision is subject to immediate enforcement in terms of recovery of alimony for one month.

The court’s decision comes into force after the expiration of the term for filing an appeal by all parties to the case, if an appeal has not been filed.

If an appeal is filed, the decision, if it is not revoked, comes into force after the return of the appeal, refusal to open or close the appeal proceedings, or adoption of a resolution of the court of appeal based on the results of the appeal review.

An appeal against a court decision shall be filed with the Kyiv Court of Appeal within thirty days from the date of its proclamation. If only the introductory and operative parts of the court resolution were announced at the court hearing, or if the case is considered (the issue is resolved) without notifying (summoning) the parties to the case, the specified period is calculated from the date of drawing up the full court decision.

Judge, – Belokonna I.V.

10.11.2021 Case No. 756/11281/21

Unique No 756/11281/21

Proceedings No. 2/756/5540/21

r i s e n n i a

in the name of Ukraine

October 28, 2021 Kyiv

Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv composed of:

Presiding Judge – Belokonna I.V.,

with the participation of the secretary – Mushketyk I.V.,

Having considered in an open court session in Kyiv in simplified proceedings a civil case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_2 on recovery of alimony for the maintenance of children, –

C S T A N O V I C:

In July 1, the plaintiff PERSON_2021 filed a lawsuit against the defendant PERSON_2 to recover child support.

The claim is substantiated by the fact that on 10.02.2007 a marriage was concluded between her and the defendant. They have two sons from the marriage: PERSON_3, INFORMATION_1, and PERSON_4, INFORMATION_2.

However, the defendant does not participate in the maintenance of children, does not provide the necessary financial assistance. That is why the plaintiff appealed to the court and asked, taking into account the financial situation of the defendant, to collect monthly alimony in her favor in the amount of UAH 20,000.00 for each child.

On August 05, 2021, a court ruling opened simplified proceedings in the case.

At the court hearing, the plaintiff’s representative supported the claims and asked to satisfy them.

The defendant’s representative admitted the claims in part at the court hearing, since the average monthly income of PERSON_2 is currently UAH 83,145.00, so his income is not enough to pay alimony in the total amount of UAH 40,000.00 per month. In addition, the defendant is also dependent on his minor son PERSON_5, INFORMATION_3, and daughter PERSON_6, INFORMATION_2. On the basis of the above, the defendant agreed to pay alimony in the total amount of UAH 10,000.00 per month for both children.

Having heard the explanations of the representatives of the parties, having examined the written materials of the case, the court comes to the conclusion that the claim is subject to partial satisfaction.

The court established the following facts and the corresponding legal relations.

The parties INFORMATION_4 had a son PERSON_3, which is confirmed by the birth certificate No. NUMBER_1.

Also, the parties INFORMATION_5 had a son PERSON_4, which is confirmed by the birth certificate No. NUMBER_2.

In accordance with Art. 180 of the Family Code of Ukraine, parents are obliged to support the child until the child reaches the age of majority.

In accordance with Parts 1, 2 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, when determining the amount of alimony, the court takes into account: the state of health and financial situation of the child; state of health and financial situation of the alimony payer; the alimony payer has other children, disabled husband, wife, parents, daughter, son; availability of movable and immovable property, cash; expenses of the alimony payer proved by the alimony collector, including the purchase of immovable or movable property, the amount of which exceeds ten times the subsistence minimum for an able-bodied person, if the alimony payer has not proved the source of funds; other circumstances of significant importance.

The amount of alimony must be necessary and sufficient to ensure the harmonious development of the child. The minimum amount of child support for one child may not be less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 184 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the court, at the request of the recipient, determines the amount of alimony in a fixed amount of money.

In accordance with Art. 191 of the Family Code of Ukraine, alimony is awarded by a court decision from the date of filing a claim.

According to Part 1 of Art. 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims or objections, except for the cases established by this Code.

According to the tax return No. 9372018217 for 2020, the average monthly income of PERSON_2 is currently UAH 83,145.00.

According to birth certificates No. NUMBER_3 and No. NUMBER_4, the defendant is also the father of a minor PERSON_5, INFORMATION_3, as well as a minor PERSON_6, INFORMATION_2.

Having evaluated the evidence provided in the case, taking into account the fact that the defendant is obliged to support the children until they reach the age of majority, to create the necessary conditions for their development and life, taking into account the state of health and ability to work of the defendant, his income, the presence of other minor children, the court considers it possible to partially satisfy the plaintiff’s claims, namely, to collect monthly alimony from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff for the maintenance of children PERSON_3 , INFORMATION_1 , and PERSON_4 , INFORMATION_2 , in the amount of UAH 7,500.00 for each child, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the children reach the age of majority.

The Court considers that such an amount of child support on a monthly basis is reasonable and appropriate.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 191 of the Family Code of Ukraine, alimony is awarded by a court decision from the date of filing a claim.

In accordance with Art. 133, 141 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court awards a court fee in the amount of UAH 908.00 from the defendant in favor of the state.

Guided by Articles 180-185, 191 of the Family Code of Ukraine, Articles 5, 12-13, 76, 81, 133, 141, 263-265 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court, –

W i r i w i v:

The claim is to be satisfied partially.

Collect monthly from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_6 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_5 ) in favor of PERSON_1 (address: ADDRESS_2 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_6 ) alimony in a fixed amount of money in the amount of UAH 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred) 00 kopecks for the maintenance of the son of PERSON_3, INFORMATION_1, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the child reaches the age of majority.

Collect monthly from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_6 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_5 ) in favor of PERSON_1 (address: ADDRESS_2 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_6 ) alimony in a fixed amount of money in the amount of UAH 7,500 (seven thousand five hundred) 00 kopecks for the maintenance of the son of PERSON_4, INFORMATION_2, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the child reaches the age of majority.

The rest of the claims are to be dismissed.

To collect from PERSON_2 (address: ADDRESS_1 ; INFORMATION_6 ; RNOKPP NUMBER_5 ) to the state budget the court fee in the amount of 908 (nine hundred and eight) hryvnias 00 kopecks.

The decision is subject to immediate enforcement in terms of recovery of alimony for one month.

The court’s decision comes into force after the expiration of the term for filing an appeal by all parties to the case, if an appeal has not been filed.

If an appeal is filed, the decision, if it is not revoked, comes into force after the return of the appeal, refusal to open or close the appeal proceedings, or adoption of a resolution of the court of appeal based on the results of the appeal review.

An appeal against a court decision shall be filed with the Kyiv Court of Appeal within thirty days from the date of its proclamation. If only the introductory and operative parts of the court resolution were announced at the court hearing, or if the case is considered (the issue is resolved) without notifying (summoning) the parties to the case, the specified period is calculated from the date of drawing up the full court decision.

The full text of the decision was made on 10.11.2021.

Judge, – Belokonna I.V.

KYIV COURT OF APPEAL

Appeal proceedings No. 22-ц/824/17827/2021

Case No. 756/11281/21

U X V A L A

On the Opening of Appeal Proceedings

December 08, 2021 Kyiv

The Kyiv Court of Appeal, consisting of the panel of judges of the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases:

Presiding Judge T.Ts. Kashperska,

Judges: Finageyev V.O., Yavorsky M.A.,

resolving the issue of opening appeal proceedings on the appeals of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2 and PERSON_3 against the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021 in the case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_3 on the recovery of child support, –

v s t a n o v i v :

By the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv dated October 28, 2021, the claim was partially satisfied. The full text of the decision was drawn up on November 10, 2021. Disagreeing with this decision, on December 1, 2, the plaintiff PERSON_01, represented by PERSON_2021, filed an appeal by mail directly to the Kyiv Court of Appeal.

The defendant PERSON_3, also disagreeing with the decision of the court of first instance, filed an appeal on November 29, 2021 by mail to the court of first instance.

Appeals are filed with the appropriate court by persons who have the right to appeal. In terms of form and content, appeals meet the requirements of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine.

A petition was added to the appeal of the plaintiff PERSON_1 to include new evidence in the case file and to demand evidence, the discovery of which was refused by the court of first instance.

In accordance with Art. 359 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, if applications or petitions are filed together with the appeal, the court in its ruling on the opening of appeal proceedings shall establish a period within which the parties to the case must submit their objections to the submitted applications or petitions, unless otherwise provided by this Code.

According to Art. 360 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the parties to the case have the right to submit to the court of appeal a response to the appeal in writing. The response to the appeal must contain: the name of the court of appeal; name (title), postal address of the person who submits a response to the appeal, as well as the number of the means of communication, e-mail address, if any; substantiation of objections to the content and requirements of the appeal; if necessary, a petition of the person who submits a response to the appeal; list of materials to be attached. The statement of defense shall be accompanied by evidence of sending (providing) copies of the statement of defense and the documents attached to it to other parties to the case. The absence of a response to the appeal does not prevent the review of the decision of the court of first instance.

Guided by Art. 359, 360, 361 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, –

U x v a l i v:

To open appeal proceedings on the appeals of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2 and PERSON_3 against the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021.

Send to the parties to the case a copy of the decision to open appeal proceedings and copies of appeals with the materials attached to them.

Provide the parties to the case with a deadline of December 22, 2021 to file responses to appeals and objections to the motion.

The ruling is not subject to appeal.

Presiding:

Judges:

KYIV COURT OF APPEAL

Appeal proceedings No. 22-ц/824/17827/2021

Case No. 756/11281/21

U X V A L A

December 28, 2021 Kyiv

Kyiv Court of Appeal consisting of the panel of judges of the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases: Presiding Judge T.Ts. Kashperska, Judges V.O. Finageev, M.A. Yavorsky,

Having considered the petition of the representative of PERSON_1 – PERSON_2 in preparation for the appeal hearing of the case on the appeal of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2 and the appeal of PERSON_3 against the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021 in the case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_3 on the recovery of child support, –

v s t a n o v i v :

By the decision of the Kyiv Court of Appeal dated December 08, 2021, the appeal proceedings in this case were opened and the deadline for filing a response to the appeals was granted.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 365 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the judge-rapporteur, in order to prepare the case for appeal hearing, at the request of the parties and other participants in the case, decides on the summoning of witnesses, the appointment of an expert examination, the discovery of evidence, court orders for the collection of evidence, the involvement of a specialist or an interpreter in the case.

To the appeal of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2, a petition for discovery of evidence and attachment of additional evidence to the case file is attached, this petition is subject to resolution during the preparation of the case for appeal consideration in accordance with Part 1 of Art. 365 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine.

In the petition for discovery of evidence, the representative of PERSON_2, indicating that the relevant petition was not resolved by the court of first instance, and that this information is important for determining the level of income of the defendant, determining his expenses, including determining from the defendant expenses that exceed his earnings (income), asked to request from banking institutions JSC CB “PrivatBank”, JSC “Universal Bank”, JSC “Raiffeisen Bank”, JSC “Oschadbank” information constituting banking secrecy, namely information on all accounts of an individual (as well as an individual entrepreneur) PERSON_3 available in these banks, information on the balance of funds on such accounts as of the date of receipt of court requests, as well as on the movement of funds on such accounts from January 01, 2019 to July 23, 2021; request from the information administrator – the Main Center for Special Information Processing of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine information in the form of an extract from the database on crossing the state border of Ukraine in the period from January 01, 2016 to July 23, 2021 PERSON_3; request from the main service center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs information about vehicles owned by PERSON_3 .

In the motion to add additional evidence to the case file, PERSON_2 noted that after the court decision was pronounced, the plaintiff received information that the defendant purchased real estate in 2020, which was registered in the name of the defendant’s wife PERSON_4 and subsequently donated to her mother PERSON_5 . Since the above circumstances confirm the excess of the defendant’s expenses over his income in the absence of confirmation of the sources of their origin and legality, he asked to attach to the case file additional evidence that was not submitted to the court of first instance for valid reasons – a copy of the sale and purchase agreement dated March 13, 2020 and the gift agreement dated March 17, 2020 of the apartment ADDRESS_1 .

The defendant PERSON_3 represented by the representative of PERSON_6 objected to this petition, in which PERSON_6 asked to dismiss it as groundless and unfounded, noted that the plaintiff and his representative do not belong to the circle of entities that have the right to require the bank to disclose information constituting bank secrecy; information about crossing the state border of Ukraine cannot be proper evidence in determining the financial condition of the defendant; Information about registered vehicles and their owners is open and publicly available and could be obtained at the request of a lawyer.

As for the additional evidence that the plaintiff’s representative asked to attach to the case file, he noted that this evidence was inadmissible, since it was not properly certified, the plaintiff and her representative were not vested with the powers determined by the Law of Ukraine “On Notary” to obtain documents containing notarial secrecy concerning persons who are not parties to this case; The evidence that the plaintiff’s representative asks the court to attach is inadequate, since it does not relate to the subject of proof in this case.

In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 368 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the case is considered by the court of appeal according to the rules established for the consideration of the case in the order of simplified claim proceedings, with the specifics established by this chapter.

In accordance with Part 3 of Art. 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, evidence that has not been submitted to the court of first instance shall be accepted by the court only in exceptional cases, if the party to the case has provided evidence of the impossibility of its submission to the court of first instance for reasons that objectively did not depend on him.

In accordance with Part 5 of Art. 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court assists the parties to the trial in exercising their rights provided for by this Code, and prevents the abuse of their rights by the parties to the trial.

In accordance with Part 2 of Art. 214 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the presiding judge, in accordance with the task of civil proceedings, manages the course of the court session, ensures compliance with the sequence and order of procedural actions, the exercise by the parties to the trial of their procedural rights and the fulfillment of their duties, directs the trial to ensure a full, comprehensive and objective clarification of the circumstances of the case, eliminating from the trial everything that is not essential for the resolution of the case.

Thus, it can be seen from the materials of the case that together with the claim, PERSON_1 filed a petition, in which, among other things, he asked to request the information specified in the petition attached to the appeal.

This motion was not decided by the court of first instance.

In accordance with paragraph 2 of part 1 of Art. 62 of the Law of Ukraine “On Banks and Banking”, information about legal entities and individuals, which constitutes banking secrecy, is disclosed by banks by court decision.

Having examined the petition, the defendant’s objections, having examined the materials of the case and the appeal, the court of appeal comes to the conclusion that there are no grounds for satisfying the petition in terms of requesting from banking institutions information on all accounts of an individual (as well as an individual entrepreneur) PERSON_3 available in these banks, information on the balance of funds on such accounts as of the date of receipt of court requests, as well as on the movement of funds on such accounts from January 01, 2019 to July 23, 2021, since the information requested by the plaintiff does not confirm the circumstances about the financial situation of the defendant, which are to be established when making a court decision on the recovery of alimony.

In the other part, the motion for discovery of evidence is also unfounded, since the plaintiff did not confirm the inability to independently provide evidence, including in accordance with Art. 20 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Bar and Practice of Law”, there is no evidence of applying to the relevant institutions with attorney’s requests and evidence of refusal to provide the requested information.

The motion to add additional evidence is not subject to satisfaction based on the following.

In accordance with Parts 2, 3 of Art. 83 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the plaintiff, persons who are entitled by law to apply to the court in the interests of other persons, must submit evidence along with the filing of a statement of claim. The defendant, a third party who does not make independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute, must submit evidence to the court along with the submission of a statement of defense or written explanations of the third party.

Part 1 of Article 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine stipulates that the court shall consider cases only at the request of a person submitted in accordance with this Code, within the limits of his/her claims and on the basis of evidence submitted by the parties to the case or requested by the court in cases provided for by this Code.

In accordance with Part 4 of Art. 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, each party bears the risk of consequences related to the performance or non-performance of procedural actions.

In accordance with Art. 126 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the right to perform a procedural action is lost with the expiration of the period established by law or court. Documents submitted after the expiry of procedural deadlines shall remain without consideration, except for the cases envisaged by this Code.

Based on the foregoing, since the consideration of the case on the basis of evidence that was not submitted to the court of first instance contradicts the principle of dispositivity of civil proceedings, and since the plaintiff did not provide evidence of the impossibility of submitting new evidence to the court of first instance for reasons that objectively did not depend on him, a motion to renew the procedural term for the implementation of the relevant procedural action was not filed, The court of appeal on the basis of Part 3 of Art. 367 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine is deprived of the procedural opportunity to accept these documents as proper and admissible evidence and to provide them with an appropriate assessment.

Guided by Art. 365, 367, 368 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, –

U x v a l i v:

The motion of the representative of PERSON_1 – PERSON_2 to demand evidence and attach additional evidence to the case file shall not be satisfied.

The ruling is not subject to appeal.

Presiding:

Judges:

KYIV COURT OF APPEAL

Appeal proceedings No. 22-ц/824/17827/2021

Case No. 756/11281/21

U X V A L A

On the appointment of the case for consideration

December 29, 2021 Kyiv

Kyiv Court of Appeal consisting of the panel of judges of the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases: Presiding Judge T.Ts. Kashperska, Judges V.O. Finageev, M.A. Yavorsky,

deciding on the appointment of the case for consideration on the appeal of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2 and PERSON_3 against the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021 in the case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_3 on the recovery of alimony for the maintenance of children, –

v s t a n o v i v :

By the decision of the Kyiv Court of Appeal dated December 08, 2021, appeal proceedings were opened. The parties to the case were given a deadline for filing a response to the appeal. The defendant PERSON_3 represented by the representative PERSON_4 responded to the appeal and objected to the motion to demand evidence and attach new evidence.

According to the requirements of Part 1 of Art. 365 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, in order to prepare the case for appeal consideration, the judge-rapporteur clarified the issue of the composition of the parties to the trial, determined the nature of the disputed legal relations and the law that regulates them, clarified the circumstances referred to by the parties to the case as the basis for their claims, resolved other issues related to ensuring the appeal consideration of the case.

Guided by Art. 365, 366 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, –

U x v a l i v:

Complete the preparatory actions.

To appoint the case for consideration in the court session of the court of appeal on February 02, 2022 at 10:00 a.m. in the premises of the Kyiv Court of Appeal (2nd Solomianska St., Kyiv) with notification of the parties.

Presiding:

Judges:

KYIV COURT OF APPEAL

Appeal proceedings No. 22-ц/824/351/2022

Case 756/11281/21

P O S T A N O V A

In the name of Ukraine

February 02, 2022 Kyiv

Kyiv Court of Appeal

As part of the panel of judges of the Judicial Chamber for Civil Cases:

Presiding Judge T.Ts. Kashperska,

Judges Finageyev V.O., Yavorsky M.A.,

with the participation of the secretary Moroz N.V.,

Having considered in an open court hearing in the premises of the Kyiv Court of Appeal a civil case on the appeals of PERSON_1 filed by a representative of PERSON_2 and PERSON_3 against the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv composed of Judge Belokonna I.V., adopted in Kyiv on October 28, 2021 in the case on the claim of PERSON_1 to PERSON_3 on the recovery of child support, –

Having heard the report of the judge, having checked the arguments of the appeal, having examined the materials of the case, –

v s t a n o v i v :

In July 2021, PERSON_1 filed a lawsuit to recover alimony.

The claim is motivated by the fact that on February 10, 2007 she registered a marriage with the defendant, during which children were born – PERSON_4, INFORMATION_1, and PERSON_5, INFORMATION_2. After the birth of the child, due to the increase in the family, the parties changed the apartment, concluding a lease agreement for the apartment ADDRESS_1, where the plaintiff still lives with the children.

Since 2016, the defendant has avoided regular communication with children and has withdrawn from their upbringing, does not take full and regular part in the maintenance of children; The father does not fulfill the obligations provided by law to take care of his own children, and their fulfillment is constantly subject to certain conditions, which has the nature of manipulation and falls under the definition of economic violence against children.

The defendant is an individual entrepreneur, is a participant and owns shares in the authorized capital of Kremdisk LLC, Workshops LLC, he owns the rights to trademarks used in the activities of the premium real estate agency The Capital, owned by the defendant, and the trademark used in the activities of the company Interior Design Manufactory Mastersky, on the company’s website the defendant is also indicated as its owner and manager. The social network Instagram of The Capital agency notes the sale of real estate for 10 years in the amount of 150 million rubles. This gives grounds to assert that the defendant’s real estate agency may belong to large enterprises, and the monthly payroll of employees of this real estate agency should be at least UAH 1800000,15000,40000. According to the defendant in his video posted on Instagram, the minimum wage for one employee engaged in the rental of real estate in his agency is 20000,1 UAH, and for an employee engaged in the sale of real estate – from 62,5 UAH. From the above, we can conclude that the defendant is able to pay child support in the amount of 5,162 UAH without unnecessary complications. per month for each child. The defendant has a channel “Uncensored Real Estate” on YouTube, which as of the date of filing this lawsuit has <>.<> thousand views. subscribers, four profiles on Instagram – from <>.<> thousand. subscribers up to <> thousand. subscribers.

From the information in the State Register of Ownership Rights to Real Estate, it can be seen that the defendant owns real estate – parking spaces and a part of the apartment ADDRESS_2, parking spaces purchased by the defendant in December 2020, the total contractual value of the specified real estate is UAH 2,645,762.60.

The defendant’s lifestyle is demonstrated by him on social networks, and the cost of the wristwatch demonstrated by him on the social network Instagram is actually equal to the annual amount of child support, the defendant’s expenses are also evidenced by his trips abroad.

She asked to collect from PERSON_3 in her favor alimony for the maintenance of children PERSON_4, INFORMATION_1, and PERSON_5, INFORMATION_2, in the amount of 20000 UAH. for each child on a monthly basis until the children reach the age of majority.

By the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021, the claim was partially satisfied, alimony in the amount of UAH 3 was recovered from PERSON_1 in favor of PERSON_7500. for each child, but not less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the children reach the age of majority, the rest of the claim is dismissed.

The plaintiff PERSON_1 represented by PERSON_2, disagreeing with the decision of the court of first instance regarding the determination of the amount of alimony, filed an appeal, in which, referring to the incomplete clarification of the circumstances relevant to the case, the inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the circumstances of the case, violation of procedural law and incorrect application of substantive law, lack of necessary justifications, references to evidence and their evaluation, asked to cancel the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv of October 28, 2021 and to make a new decision by which the claim was satisfied in full.

Substantiating the appeal, she referred to the fact that the decision did not meet the procedural requirements established for the court decision, did not contain any justification, did not contain an assessment of the arguments presented by the parties to the case, did not indicate the evidence on the study of which the court decision was built, the motives for their adoption or rejection by the court. Of the entire array of evidence, the text of the decision mentions only certain pieces of evidence referred to by the defendant, namely the tax return and the birth certificates of two of his four children. According to the plaintiff, the stated circumstances testify to the imbalance of the court’s position, giving preference to the defendant in proving the circumstances of the case, since the court does not mention the arguments referred to by the plaintiff at all, as well as did not assess the evidence confirming the discrepancy between the defendant’s official income and his lifestyle, the level of expenses that are proved by the evidence provided by her.

She pointed out that the court had not established the presence or absence of grounds for applying the provisions of Part 3 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, according to which the court is not limited by the amount of earnings (income) of the alimony payer in case of establishing that he/she has expenses that exceed his/her earnings (income), and in respect of which such a alimony payer has not proved the source of funds for their payment, these circumstances were not studied by the court at all, i.e. the court of first instance did not assess the legal position of the plaintiff, In fact, based only on the request part of the statement of claim and the fact of partial recognition of the claim by the defendant.

She emphasized that she had provided evidence confirming the defendant’s expenses in amounts that significantly exceeded the amount of his income, and the sources of funds that would allow the defendant to make such expenses were not proved by the latter. The legal income of the defendant, which was established by the court as the amount of the proceeds of an individual entrepreneur, does not allow the defendant to make the expenses that take place and lead a lifestyle that the defendant makes public on social networks.

She noted that in the period 2020 – 2021, the defendant purchased four parking spaces in the residential complex “Novopecherski Lypky” with a total cost of UAH 2,582,719.60, purchased a watch with an estimated cost of UAH 240000, repeatedly went on vacation abroad. The defendant conducts business activities in 10 office premises and at the same time claims that his income is 83145 UAH. in 2020 and UAH 36666.66. in 2021. However, it seems impossible to maintain 10 office premises for this amount and pay salaries to employees, therefore, the defendant himself recognizes the fact of excess of expenses over income.

She pointed out that after the proclamation of the court decision, she received information about the purchase of an apartment by the defendant in 2020, which was registered in the name of the defendant’s new wife PERSON_6, and four days later, with his consent, it was presented to the defendant’s mother-in-law. Taking into account that the apartment was purchased in marriage, at the joint expense of the spouses, the defendant incurred expenses for its purchase from joint funds in the amount that is at least half of its value, that is, more than 2 million rubles. UAH. These circumstances also confirm the excess of the defendant’s expenses over his income in the absence of confirmation of their sources of origin and legality.

She cited the provisions of Art. 180 – 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, Art. 1, 8 of the Law of Ukraine “On Childhood Protection”, Art. 3, 27 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, noted that she considers it possible to recover from the defendant alimony for the maintenance of minor children in a fixed amount and determine the amount of alimony for their maintenance, based on the real wealth of the defendant, the level of his income and expenses, lifestyle, etc., which indicate the possibility of collecting alimony for children in the maximum amount determined by law.

The defendant PERSON_3, also disagreeing with the decision of the court of first instance, filed an appeal, in which, referring to the incomplete clarification of the circumstances relevant to the case, violation by the court of first instance of the norms of substantive and procedural law, he asked to change the decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv dated October 28, 2021 in terms of the amount of alimony, namely, to collect from him monthly in favor of the plaintiff alimony for the maintenance of children in the amount of UAH 5000. for each child monthly, but not less than 50% of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the children reach the age of majority.

Substantiating the appeal, he referred to the fact that in 2020 he, as an individual entrepreneur, received income in the amount of UAH 997740, which is confirmed by the tax return, so the average monthly income of the defendant is UAH 83145, and the average monthly income for the first half of 2021 is UAH 36666.66. After divorcing the plaintiff, PERSON_3 formed a new family by marrying PERSON_6, and in this marriage they had two children, a son PERSON_7, INFORMATION_3, and a daughter PERSON_8, INFORMATION_4. So, he has two more young children from his second marriage.

He noted that he had debt obligations totaling UAH 2,410,684. under loan agreements, and all his real estate in the form of parking spaces was mortgaged to ensure the fulfillment of debt obligations. Taking into account these circumstances, the recovery of alimony in the amount of 15000 UAH. per month on children will have a negative economic effect for the defendant and his two young children from the second marriage.

Taking into account the fact that the plaintiff does not work at all, he considered the amount of alimony determined by the court of first instance in the amount of 15000,2021 UAH unreasonable and unproven. for two children per month, since the obligation to support the children is imposed equally on both parents. In addition, the plaintiff did not provide any evidence confirming the level of monthly expenses for children. At the same time, it should be borne in mind that from July 6, the subsistence minimum for children from 18 to 2510 years old is <> UAH.

The defendant PERSON_3 represented by the representative of PERSON_9 responded to the appeal of PERSON_1, in which the defendant asked to leave the appeal unsatisfied, referring to its groundlessness and groundlessness. He noted that his real estate was mortgaged, and during the period of purchase of parking spaces in 2020, he paid alimony to the plaintiff in the amount of UAH 30000. per month, which is confirmed by the relevant receipts, but as of today, his financial situation has deteriorated significantly, which is confirmed by loan agreements and the tax return for 2021.

He noted that the appeal alleges that the defendant carried out business activities in 10 office premises and paid salaries to 300 employees, as well as purchased watches worth UAH 240000,<>. However, the above circumstances are only assumptions of the plaintiff’s representative, since they are not supported by proper and admissible evidence.

He emphasized that the plaintiff asked to recover alimony from him in the amount of 40000,<> UAH. for two children, while she does not provide any evidence at all that would confirm the amount of her monthly expenses for children, moreover, the plaintiff does not provide any evidence of the possibility of maintaining children in an equal amount with the defendant in case of recovery of such alimony.

Having checked the legality and validity of the decision of the court of first instance within the arguments and requirements of the appeal, the court of appeal considers that the appeals are not subject to satisfaction on the following grounds.

In accordance with the requirements of Art. 263 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, a court decision must be based on the principles of the rule of law, be lawful and substantiated.

A decision made by a court in accordance with the rules of substantive law in compliance with the norms of procedural law is lawful.

A well-grounded decision is a decision made on the basis of fully and comprehensively clarified circumstances, which the parties refer to as the basis for their claims and objections, confirmed by the evidence that was examined at the court hearing.

The decision of the court of first instance meets the above requirements of the law.

Partially satisfying the claim of PERSON_1 for recovery of alimony in a fixed amount of money in the amount of 7500 UAH. For each child, the court of first instance proceeded from the fact that the defendant is obliged to support the children until they reach the age of majority, to create the necessary conditions for their development and life, taking into account the state of health and ability to work of the defendant, his income, the presence of other dependent minor children, considering such an amount of alimony reasonable and appropriate.

The Court of Appeal agrees with these conclusions of the court of first instance, as they are substantiated, correspond to the circumstances of the case and the requirements of the law.

As established by the court, on February 10, 2007 PERSON_3 and PERSON_10 registered a marriage, in which children PERSON_4, INFORMATION_5, and PERSON_5, INFORMATION_4 were born (a. p. 10, 16, 17 vol. 1).

By the decision of the Avtozavodskyi District Court of the city of Kremenchuk, Poltava region, as of July 05, 2016 in the case No. 524/3849/16-ц, the marriage between PERSON_3 and PERSON_1 was dissolved (a. p. 3 – 4 vol. 2).

On pages 18 – 20 of vol. 1 there is a copy of the lease agreement dated February 20, 2015, concluded by PERSON_3 for a period up to February 19, 2017 inclusive, under the terms of which he was given an apartment for living at the address ADDRESS_3, the payment under this agreement is 13000 UAH.

On page 21 of vol. 1 there is a printout from the Unified State Register of Enterprises and Organizations of Ukraine, according to which PERSON_3 is registered as an individual entrepreneur, the date of state registration is February 26, 2003, the main activity is 68.31 of the Real Estate Agency.

On pages 22 – 31 of vol. 1 there is an extract from the Unified State Register of Enterprises and Organizations of Ukraine dated July 20, 2021 according to the search criteria “PERSON_3”, according to which PERSON_3 is the founder of Kremdisk LLC (in a state of termination), the founder of Masterski LLC.

On pages 39 – 41 of vol. 1 there is a printout of information from the thecapital.com.ua website with information about The Capital.

On pages 45 – 47 of vol. 1 there is a printout of information from the mastersky.kiev.ua website with information about the Workshops company.

On pages 48 – 116 of vol. 1 there are printouts from social networks Instagram with the publication of photos on behalf of PERSON_3.

On page 141 of Vol. 1 there is a printed photo of a close-up image of a hand with a watch, published on the social network Instagram on behalf of PERSON_3.

On page 142 of Vol. 1 there is printed information from the website of the watch manufacturer www.hublot.com regarding the model of the watch worth 7200 euros.

On pages 32 – 38 of vol. 1 there is printed information from the Special Information System of the State Enterprise “Ukrainian Intellectual Property Institute” (Ukrpatent), according to which PERSON_3 is the owner of intellectual property, namely trademarks, of the application dated December 22, 2017 m201729297, m201729296, m201729295, dated December 26, 2017 m201729334.

On pages 117 – 132 of vol. 1 there are copies of contracts of sale of four parking spaces dated December 07, 2020, November 13, 2020 at the address ADDRESS_4 and ADDRESS_4 with a total value of UAH 2582728.60.

Pages 133 – 140 of vol. 1 contain information from the State Register of Property Rights to Real Estate and the Register of Ownership Rights to Real Estate dated July 22, 2021, according to which PERSON_3 is the owner of parking spaces at the specified address, as well as part of the apartment at the address ADDRESS_5.

On pages 171 – 173 of vol. 1 there is an extract from the account of PERSON_3 in JSC CB “PrivatBank” on payments made in the period from September 02, 2016 to September 02, 2021 in favor of the recipient PERSON_1 with comments on payments “for children and life”, “utilities”, “for a doctor”, “for school”, “for birthday”.

On pages 174 – 184 of vol. 1 there are copies of receipts of PERSON_1 that she received from PERSON_3 for housing and living expenses of children 30000 UAH. monthly for April, June, July, August, September, October, November 2020, as well as from 30000 UAH. up to 33000 UAH. monthly for February, March, April, May 2021.

On a. p. 235a, vol. 1, there is a copy of the receipt dated October 13, 2021 for the money transfer PERSON_3 15000 UAH. with the appointment of alimony for PERSON_4, PERSON_5 for October 2021.

On page 187 of vol. 1 there is a copy of the act No. 1 of delivery and acceptance of works, approved by FOP PERSON_3 and PJSC “IC “Providna” that the contractor made insurance payments under insurance contracts, in which the insured persons are PERSON_1, PERSON_4, PERSON_5.

On a. p. 189, vol. 1, there is a copy of the tax return of FOP PERSON_3 for 2020, according to which he received UAH 997740 during the reporting period. Income.

On a. p. 192 vol. 1 there is a copy of the tax return of FOP PERSON_3 for the first half of 2021, according to which he received UAH 220000 during the reporting period. Income.

On a. p. 194 vol. 1 there is a copy of the marriage certificate, according to which on April 21, 2017 PERSON_3 registered a marriage with PERSON_11, in this marriage were born children PERSON_7, INFORMATION_3, and PERSON_8, INFORMATION_4 (a. p. 194 – 196 vol. 1).

On pages 185 – 186 of vol. 1 there are printed publications of photos of PERSON_3 on the social network Instagram together with children for May 2019 – March 2021.

On pages 197 – 200 of vol. 1 there is a copy of the loan agreement, under the terms of which PERSON_3 accepted from PERSON_12 a loan of UAH 1,352,344, which is the equivalent of USD 47120, which he undertook to repay by December 01, 2021 inclusive; The parties agreed that the borrower’s fulfillment of obligations under this agreement will be secured by the mortgage of parking spaces No. 98 and ADDRESS_6, owned by the borrower.

On pages 201 – 204 of vol. 1 there is a copy of the loan agreement, under the terms of which PERSON_3 accepted from PERSON_13 a loan of UAH 1,058,340, which is the equivalent of USD 37200, which he undertook to repay by December 08, 2021 inclusive; The parties agreed that the borrower’s fulfillment of obligations under this agreement will be secured by the mortgage of parking spaces No. 47 and ADDRESS_7, owned by the borrower.

On pages 205 – 216 of vol. 1 there are copies of mortgage agreements concluded by PERSON_3 in accordance with loan agreements.

These circumstances are confirmed by the evidence available in the case.

According to Art. 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, every person has the right, in accordance with the procedure established by this Code, to apply to the court for the protection of their violated, unrecognized or disputed rights, freedoms or legitimate interests.

According to Art. 12 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, each party must prove the circumstances that are important for the case and which it refers to as the basis for its claims or objections, except for the cases established by this Code.

In accordance with Art. 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court evaluates the evidence according to its inner conviction, which is based on a comprehensive, complete, objective and direct examination of the evidence available in the case.

In accordance with parts one and two of Article 27 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989, which was ratified by Resolution of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine No. 27XII (1991) of 789 February 78912 and entered into force for Ukraine on 27 September 1991, the State recognizes the right of every child to a standard of living necessary for the physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development of the child. Parents or other persons raising a child have the primary responsibility to ensure, within the limits of their abilities and financial means, the living conditions necessary for the child’s development.

In accordance with Art. 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child of 20 November 1989, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration in all actions concerning children, whether carried out by public or private social welfare agencies, courts, administrative or legislative bodies. States Parties undertake to provide the child with such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents, guardians or other persons legally responsible for him, and to this end shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures.

In accordance with Art. 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Childhood Protection” ensuring the best interests of the child – actions and decisions aimed at meeting the individual needs of the child in accordance with his/her age, gender, state of health, developmental characteristics, life experience, family, cultural and ethnic affiliation and taking into account the opinion of the child, if he/she has reached such an age and level of development that he/she can express it.

According to the first part of Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine “On Childhood Protection”, every child has the right to a standard of living sufficient for his/her physical, intellectual, moral, cultural, spiritual and social development.

According to Article 180 of the Family Code of Ukraine, parents are obliged to support the child until the child reaches the age of majority.

Payment of child support by court decision is one of the ways to fulfill the obligation to support a child by the parent who lives separately from the child.

One of the basic rights of the child is the right to maintenance, which corresponds to the constitutional obligation of parents to support their children until they reach the age of majority and is enshrined in the Family Code of Ukraine.

Recovery of alimony for the maintenance of a child is one of the ways to protect the interests of the child, to ensure that he/she receives the funds necessary for his/her life.

In accordance with Parts 1 – 3 of Art. 181 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the ways of parents’ fulfillment of the obligation to support the child are determined by agreement between them. By agreement between the child’s parents, the one of them who lives separately from the child may participate in the child’s maintenance in cash and (or) in kind. By a court decision, funds for the maintenance of a child (alimony) are awarded in a share of the income of the child’s mother or father or in a fixed amount of money at the choice of the parent or other legal representatives of the child with whom the child lives. The method of recovery of alimony, determined by a court decision, is changed by a court decision at the claim of the recipient of alimony.

In accordance with Parts 1 – 2 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, when determining the amount of alimony, the court takes into account: 1) the state of health and financial situation of the child; 2) the state of health and financial situation of the alimony payer; 3) the alimony payer has other children, disabled husband, wife, parents, daughter, son; 3-1) ownership, possession and/or use of property and property rights, including movable and immovable property, funds, exclusive rights to the results of intellectual activity, corporate rights, on the right of ownership, possession and/or use of the alimony payer; 3-2) expenses of the alimony payer proved by the alimony collector, including the purchase of immovable or movable property, the amount of which exceeds ten times the subsistence minimum for an able-bodied person, if the alimony payer has not proved the source of funds; 4) other circumstances of significant importance.

The amount of alimony must be necessary and sufficient to ensure the harmonious development of the child.

The minimum guaranteed amount of alimony for one child cannot be less than 50 percent of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age.

The minimum recommended amount of alimony for one child is the amount of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age and may be awarded by the court in case of sufficiency of earnings (income) of the alimony payer.

In accordance with Part 3 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the court is not limited by the amount of earnings (income) of the alimony payer in case of establishing that he/she has expenses that exceed his/her earnings (income), and in respect of which such a alimony payer has not proved the source of funds for their payment.

In accordance with Art. 184 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the court, at the request of the recipient, determines the amount of alimony in a fixed amount of money. The amount of child support determined by the court or by agreement between the parents in a fixed amount of money is subject to indexation annually in accordance with the law, unless the payer and the recipient of child support have agreed otherwise. At the request of the recipient of alimony, indexation may be carried out by the court for another period.

According to Article 141 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the mother and the father have equal rights and obligations in relation to the child, regardless of whether they were married to each other.

Thus, since the defendant is obliged to maintain minor children, the court of first instance came to a reasonable conclusion, with which the Court of Appeal agrees, that alimony for the maintenance of minor children living with the plaintiff is subject to recovery from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff.

Collecting alimony from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff for the maintenance of minor children in the amount of 7500 UAH. for each child, the court of first instance in accordance with Art. 184 of the Family Code of Ukraine took into account that the plaintiff asked to determine the amount of alimony in a fixed amount of money.

The plaintiff and the defendant appealed against the decision of the court of first instance in terms of the amount of alimony determined by the court.

Assessing the court’s conclusions on the merits of the claims and the arguments of the appeals, the court of appeal is guided by the following.

In accordance with Art. 76 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, evidence is any data on the basis of which the court establishes the presence or absence of circumstances (facts) that substantiate the claims and objections of the parties to the case, and other circumstances that are important for the resolution of the case. This data is established by the following means: written, physical and electronic evidence; expert opinions; testimony of witnesses.

The characteristics of evidence are its propriety, reliability, admissibility and sufficiency. Thus, evidence that contains information on the subject of proof is appropriate. Reliable evidence is evidence on the basis of which it is possible to establish the actual circumstances of the case. Sufficient evidence is the evidence that in its entirety makes it possible to conclude about the presence or absence of circumstances of the case, which are included in the subject of proof (Articles 77 – 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine).

In accordance with Art. 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court evaluates the evidence according to its internal conviction, which is based on a comprehensive, complete, objective and direct examination of the evidence available in the case. No evidence has a predetermined value for the court. The court assesses the propriety, admissibility and reliability of each piece of evidence separately, as well as the sufficiency and interconnection of the evidence in its entirety. The court evaluates both the evidence collected in the case as a whole and each piece of evidence (a group of similar types of evidence) contained in the case, motivates the rejection or consideration of each piece of evidence (group of evidence).

In accordance with Part 6 of Art. 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, proof cannot be based on assumptions.

In the statement of claim and in the appeal, PERSON_1 referred to the provisions of Part 3 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, noted that the defendant’s expenses exceed his earnings (income), and the defendant did not prove the source of funds for their payment, therefore, the court should not be limited by the amount of earnings (income) of the alimony payer.

At the same time, there is proper, reliable, admissible and sufficient evidence of the excess of the defendant’s expenses over his earnings (income), which is her procedural duty in accordance with Art. 81 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, was not provided by the plaintiff.

Such evidence is not the excerpts from the Unified State Register of Enterprises and Organizations of Ukraine according to the data of the founder (participant) PERSON_3, evidence of the defendant’s trademarks, printouts of information from the websites of the companies founded by the defendant, printed photos from the defendant’s web pages in social networks, printed information from the watch manufacturer’s website about the watch model, which, according to the plaintiff’s arguments, belongs to PERSON_3, since it is impossible to establish the amount of income from this evidence or the defendant’s expenses, as well as to identify the property belonging to him and its value.

The arguments of the appeal of PERSON_1 are not confirmed, assumptions and rejected by the Court of Appeal that the defendant carries out business activities in ten office premises, and therefore must bear the costs of renting ten offices and remunerating the labor of 300 employees, for which the official income received by him in 2020-2021 cannot be enough.

Assessing the evidence provided by the plaintiff for the purchase of parking spaces by the defendant in 2020 with a total value of UAH 2,582,719.60, the Court of Appeal takes into account that, taking into account the evidence available in the case file of the income received by the defendant as an individual entrepreneur according to tax returns, loan agreements concluded by him in the amount of UAH 1,352,344. and UAH 1,058,340, the arguments of the plaintiff in the appeal about the excess of the defendant’s expenses over his income in the absence of confirmation of the sources of their origin and legality were not confirmed during the appeal review and are rejected by the court of appeal.

The Court of Appeal does not accept the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_1 regarding the purchase by the defendant of an apartment in 2020, the ownership of which was registered to the wife of the defendant PERSON_6, since such arguments are based on new evidence that was not the subject of assessment by the court of first instance and which was rejected by the Court of Appeal by its ruling of December 28, 2021.

Under such circumstances, the court of first instance had no grounds to apply the provisions of Part 3 of Art. 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine, therefore, the arguments of the appeal that the court did not take into account the circumstances that may be the basis for determining the amount of alimony, based on the real wealth of the defendant, the level of his income and expenses, lifestyle, etc., which indicate the possibility of recovery of alimony for children in the maximum amount determined by law, are groundless and are rejected by the court of appeal.

Taking into account the lack of information in the appeals regarding any other circumstances that are essential and must be taken into account by the court, taking into account the equality of not only rights, but also the obligation of parents to support minor children, the court of appeal agrees with the conclusions of the court of first instance on determining the amount of alimony in the amount of 7500 UAH. for each child on a monthly basis, starting from July 26, 2021 and until the children reach the age of majority.

The Court of Appeal, agreeing with the court of first instance, considers such an amount of alimony to be necessary and sufficient to ensure the harmonious maintenance, development and treatment of children, which is not subject to increase or decrease on the grounds specified in the appeals.

The Court of Appeal takes into account that during the consideration of the case by the court of first instance, the defendant provided evidence of voluntary participation in the maintenance of children in the form of a receipt for the payment of alimony for October 2021 in the amount of UAH 15000. at his own discretion (a. p. 235a, vol. 1), from which it is seen that he can pay alimony in such an amount at the time of the decision, and these circumstances are not refuted by the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_3.

Taking into account the above, the Court of Appeal rejects as groundless and untenable the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_3 that the recovery of alimony in the amount of 15000 UAH. per month on children will have a negative economic effect for the defendant and his two young children from the second marriage.

The arguments of the appeal of PERSON_3 that the defendant has two minor children from the second marriage, there are debt obligations in the total amount of 2.4 million UAH. UAH, and the real estate in the form of parking spaces was mortgaged, do not refute the correct conclusions of the court of first instance about the expediency and validity of the determined amount of alimony in the fixed amount of UAH 7500. Monthly.

The Court of Appeal takes into account that according to the loan agreements available in the case file, the deadline for fulfilling the obligation expired on December 01, 2021 and December 08, 2021, respectively, and the defendant did not provide evidence of other monetary obligations.

In addition, the Court of Appeal does not accept the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_3 that the plaintiff does not work at all and did not provide evidence of her bringing expenses for the maintenance of children, and therefore, taking into account the principle of equal participation of both parents in the maintenance of minor children, the recovery of alimony from him in the amount of 7500 UAH. for each child is unproven and unsubstantiated.

The absence of such evidence in the case file does not release the defendant from the obligation to support minor children living with the plaintiff, in accordance with Art. 181 of the Investigative Committee of Ukraine.

Assessing the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_1 that the maintenance of the child by the parents should ensure his/her best interests and ensure his/her full development, and that the amount of alimony should be necessary and sufficient to ensure the harmonious development of the child, the Court of Appeal proceeds from the fact that the provisions of part 2 of Art. Article 182 of the Family Code of Ukraine establishes the minimum recommended amount of alimony for one child in the amount of the subsistence minimum for a child of the appropriate age and may be awarded by the court in case of sufficiency of earnings (income) of the alimony payer.

The subsistence minimum for children aged 6 to 18 at the time of the decision of the court of first instance was 2510 UAH, thus, the court of first instance ensured the maintenance of children in the amount three times higher than the minimum recommended amount of alimony for one child, which corresponds to the best interests of children, therefore, the arguments of the plaintiff’s appeal in this part do not refute the correct conclusions of the court of first instance and are not grounds for reversal of the court decision.

The Court of Appeal takes into account that the plaintiff did not provide any evidence in the form of justification of expenses for children to confirm the need to recover alimony for the maintenance of each child in the amount of 20000,<> UAH. Monthly.

The Court of Appeal also takes into account that Art. Article 180 of the Family Code of Ukraine imposes the obligation to support minor children on both parents.

The Court of Appeal takes into account that the parties are not deprived of the opportunity to apply to the court with a claim to change the amount of alimony in accordance with the provisions of Art. 192 of the Family Code of Ukraine, and the plaintiff, in addition, has the right to file a claim for recovery of additional expenses for children from the defendant if there are grounds established by Art. 185 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

The Court of Appeal does not accept the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_1 that the decision of the court of first instance lacks proper justification, assessment of the evidence provided by the parties to the case, does not indicate the evidence on the study of which the court decision is based, the motives for their acceptance or rejection by the court, does not mention the arguments of the plaintiff regarding the lifestyle of the defendant and the level of his expenses, based on the following.

The European Court of Human Rights pointed out that paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the Convention obliges the courts to give reasons for their decisions, but this cannot be perceived as a requirement to provide a detailed answer to every argument. The limits of this obligation may vary, depending on the nature of the decision. In addition, it is necessary to take into account, inter alia, the variety of arguments that a party may present to the court and the differences that exist in the States parties, in view of the provisions of the law, traditions, legal opinions, and the presentation and formulation of decisions. Thus, the question whether the court has complied with its obligation to provide reasons under Article 6 of the Convention can only be determined in the light of the particular circumstances of the case (PRONINA v. UKRAINE, no. 63566/00, § 23, ECtHR, 18 July 2006).

Thus, the court of first instance made a lawful and justified decision on the recovery of alimony, the court’s conclusions on the amount of alimony were not refuted by the arguments of the appeals, therefore, the arguments of PERSON_1 regarding the incompleteness of the justification of the decision are not grounds for its cancellation, since this did not lead to an incorrect decision in the case.

Thus, during the appellate review, the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_3 that the court did not properly assess the circumstances relevant to the case, and the arguments of the appeal of PERSON_1 that the court of first instance did not fully establish the circumstances of the case and did not prove the circumstances that are important for the case, the necessary references to evidence and their evaluation, inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the circumstances of the case, violation of the requirements of the procedural law and non-application of the applicable substantive law are not provided.

Other arguments of the appeals are not based on evidence and the law, are reduced to disagreement with the court decision, reassessment of evidence, which was duly assessed by the court of first instance, and do not refute the conclusions of the court of first instance.

Thus, the court of first instance correctly established the legal nature of the claim, sufficiently determined the nature of the disputed legal relations and the rules of substantive law to be applied, fully and comprehensively examined the evidence available in the case and gave them a proper assessment by virtue of the requirements of Articles 12, 13, 81, 89 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, correctly established the circumstances of the case, as a result of which it made a lawful and substantiated decision, which meets the requirements of Articles 263, 264 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, there are no grounds for its cancellation on the grounds set forth in the appeals.

Analyzing the scope of the study of the applicants’ arguments and their reflection in the decision of the court of first instance, the issue of exhaustiveness of the conclusions of the court of first instance, the Court of Appeal proceeds from the fact that in the case under consideration, the parties to the dispute were provided with an exhaustive answer to all significant questions arising in the qualification of the disputed relations, and the arguments set forth in the appeals do not refute the reasonable and correct conclusions of the court.

In accordance with Art. 375 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court of appeal leaves the appeal unsatisfied, and the court resolution unchanged, if it recognizes that the court of first instance adopted the court decision in compliance with the norms of substantive and procedural law.

In such circumstances, the Court of Appeal concludes that the decision of the court of first instance corresponds to the circumstances of the case, was made in compliance with the norms of substantive and procedural law and cannot be canceled on the grounds set forth in the appeals.

Guided by Art. 367, 374, 375, 381, 382 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the court, –

P o s t a n o v i v :

The appeal of PERSON_1 filed by the representative of PERSON_2 and the appeal of PERSON_3 shall be dismissed.

The decision of the Obolonskyi District Court of Kyiv as of October 28, 2021 shall be left unchanged.

The decision of the Court of Appeal comes into force from the date of its adoption and may be appealed to the Supreme Court within thirty days.

The full text of the resolution was drawn up on February 03, 2022.

Chairman: Kashperska T.Ts.

Judges: Finageyev V.O.

Yavorsky M.A.

Pysarenko (Zhurba) Yuliya Oleksiivna, born on April 6, 1993, born in Kremenchuk, Poltava region, identification code – 3406408821 (received at the address: Kyiv, Obolonskyi ave., building 37, apartment 405). In 2018, she indicated the address of registration: Kyiv, str. Vyshhorodska, building 45, sq. 8. Probably currently actually lives at the address: Kyiv, st. Andrii Verhoglyada, bldg. 11, sq. 145. Passport No. 000607318, issued by the Podilskyi Department of the Central State Medical University of Kyiv and the Kyiv region, dated June 9, 2016. Passport for traveling abroad: FG690023 issued by the Department of Centralized Data Processing No. 3 of the GU DMS in Kyiv on June 23, 2017. Driver’s license VKR358232 issued by the territorial service center 8042 of the regional service center of the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Kyiv on July 4, 2017.

According to available information, Yulia Oleksiivna is married to Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych Pisarenko, born on February 9, 1982 (code 2999002237). Currently, the divorce process is ongoing, the court date is set for October 2, 2023. They are raising two children together, a boy – Leonard Kostiantynovych Pisarenka, born on September 1, 2017. (place of birth: North Miami Beach, USA, State of Florida (birth certificate No. 5222 dated 12.10.2017)) and a girl, Pysarenko Monika Kostyantynivna, born on May 11, 2019, (place of birth: USA, State Florida, Miami Beach (finding on the renewal of the act record of civil status dated 09/11/2019)).

Can use phone numbers +380675085230 (Viber, Telegram, Whatsapp) and +380677095780.

Has its own pages in social networks:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ylia.zhurba , according to which Yulia is listed as the author of the children’s book “The Magical World is Nearby” (the book was published in 2022, “RANOK” publishing house, in paper format, the language of the book is Ukrainian, English. Price – 1236 UAH).

Instagram – personal: https://www.instagram.com/pysarenko_yuliia/

Instagram – working: https://www.instagram.com/real_dubai_estate_/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D .

Tiktok – Yulia Pysarenko (@pysarenko_yuliia) | TikTok

After looking at the social media pages of Yulia Oleksiivna and her husband – Kostiantyn Vitaliyovych Pisarenko, we can conclude that the above-mentioned persons often spend time abroad in different parts of the world, this may be related to both their professional activities and a sufficient standard of living .

Since January 25, 2022, Yu.O. Pisarenko, registered as an individual entrepreneur. The main type of activity is real estate agencies. During registration, she indicated the address: city of Kyiv, ave. Rokossovsky Marshala, bldg. 3, sq. 532, and contact phone +380675085230.

Agency sites: Novopecherski Lipki real estate agency – sale and rent of apartments (novolipki.com.ua) and Real Estate Agency in Kyiv ✓ T.H.E. Capital (thecapital.com.ua)

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NovolipkiRealEstateAgency  and https://www.facebook.com/thecapitalkievua

The founder of the agencies is Konstantin Pisarenko, as stated in the Facebook post:

https://www.facebook.com/vladyslav.lysechko/posts/pfbid037i45n7De7bcWM5tp4yj6KJAbDq85BnhyaNk9pcd5WXwvcYrApvRSj4MWsyWbgYwPl?__cft__[0]=AZWo8khL5s0Bka14V6BVrtben4Le6S0COvF0KRt0J8HZo4ObQZ_IBFIrKpFQhOqR3lcsB0e1PkmNGwOFc2d5KZZHW-S49Bt6BEhTNSQ-WwkBRhjNUKuyreeYi3LJ8Cf-oS-z_8XUUrKseK5UvSktRGjdAwz8gL1vzBFFm69TVifX6ZMc_GMmCgYiLDm0z5LT7_A&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

According to the available information, as of September 2023, Yuliya Oleksiivna Pysarenko is not registered as the owner, founder and manager of any legal entity.

According to available information, Yuliya Oleksiivna is the owner (co-owner) of the following real estate:

land plot: Kyiv region, Vasylkivskyi district, Krushynka village, cadastral number: 3221484000:06:012:0263;

Odesa Region, Odesa, Fontanskaya Road (Perekop Division Street), building 153/16, quarter 13.

According to the available information, the following TK is registered in the name of Yulia Oleksiivna:

– passenger car “TOYOTA RAV4”, black, 2007, date of birth AA3413MT. The date of registration is August 1, 2014.

– passenger car “INFINITI EX35”, black, 2008, date of birth AA3588IN. The date of registration is February 25, 2016.

– “RENAULT MASTER” truck, white, 2015, date of birth AA4090TA. The date of registration is November 10, 2017.

– passenger car “MERCEDES–BENZ S 500L”, black, 2007, date of birth AA5995SV. The date of registration is 12/21/2017.

– “MERCEDES-BENZ S 600” passenger car, black, 2007, date of birth AA5995RO. The date of registration is January 23, 2018.

– VOLKSWAGEN TRANSPORTER truck, white, 2011, date of birth AA9995EM. Date of registration – 06.06.2018.

– “RENAULT MASTER” truck, white, 2015, date of birth AA9995EK. The date of registration is June 13, 2018.

– “RENAULT MASTER” truck, white, 2015, date of birth AA9995EI. The date of registration is June 13, 2018.

– passenger car “VOLKSWAGEN MULTIVAN”, black, 2012, date of birth AA9995EO. The date of registration is 14. 06.2018.

– passenger car “VOLKSWAGEN PASSAT”, black, 2010, date of birth AA3360SS. The date of registration is July 11, 2018.

According to available information, Yuliya Oleksiivna Pisarenko is a participant in legal disputes, namely:

the defendant in case No. 756/9722/23 Obolonsky District Court of Kyiv from 07.2023. Case category: Civil proceedings. Subject of the lawsuit: Divorce. The plaintiff is Kostyantyn Vitaliyovych Pisarenko (the court date is set for October 2, 2023).

Taken from an open source: Yuliia Pysarenko – YouControl

mother-in-law – Zhurba Olga Vasylivna, born on 15.04.1973, born in Pavlograd, Dnipropetrovsk region, identification code – 2676813808 (registered on 21.03.1998 at the address: Poltava region, Kremenchuk, Irinieva str., bud. 6, apt. 88). In 2019, the address of the district was announced: Poltava region, Kremenchuk village, ul. Shevchenko, bud. 55, apt. 38. Passport series KO No 636795, dates of the Avtozavodskiy RV KMU UMVS Ukrainy in the Poltava region, on 01.01.2006. Vodiyske posvidchennya RRV000854 vidane VRER DAI z servovvannya m. Kremenchuk ta Kremenchuk district of the police department of Ukraine in Poltava region, vid 22.03.2006.
Zgidno nayavnoji informatii, Olga Vasylivna zamіzhnya za Zhurboyu Oleksiyem Vitaliyovych, born 03.03.1973, (code 2672510333 (svidocstvo pro shlyub No 1516 vid 26.12.1992 roku)). May a spilnu daughter – Pysarenko (Zhurba) Yuliyu Oleksiyivna, born on 06.04.1993, (aktovy zapisa pro narodzhennya No 541 vid 29.04.1993).

You can use the phone number +380675350992 (Viber, Telegram, Whatsapp).

Maje vlas storinky v sotsialnykh merezhah: Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100017235395397 .
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/olgajurba.yspeh/ . In the course of the information on the story, Olga Vasylivna positsionue sebe, as a psychologist (Consultation: special service, simeine, management, team).
Takoj, Olga Vasylivna may and leads her YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@user-kb6fz3xz3i ), on how to do it in real life situations and how to use psychology.

Since October 5, 2005, O.V. Zhurba has been registered as an individual entrepreneur. The main type of activity is consulting on issues of commercial activity and management. During registration, she indicated the address: Poltava Region, Kremenchuk, str. Shevchenko, building 55, sq. 38.

For the real information on the veresen 2023, Zhurba Olga Vasylivna is not a notary, a novnik and a kerivnik at the other legal entities.

For the real information of Olga Vasylivna je vlasnik (sivvlasnik) nastvennoji nerukhomosti:
– m. Kyiv, vul. Dragomirova Mykhayla (vul. Verkhoglyada Andriya) bud. 11, apt. 145;
– m. Kyiv, vul. Dragomirova Mykhayla (vul. Verkhoglyada Andriya) bud. 13, garage 138;

For the real information on the name of Olga Vasylivnya, the following technical specifications were launched:
– passenger car “LEXUS RX 350”, large color, born in 2008, doctor of sciences ВІ0085ВМ. Date of reorganization – 24.02.2015.

In reality, Zhurba Olga Vasylivna is a participant in court disputes, and herself: – vidpovidach according to the certificate No.
524/2058/14-ц of the Appellate Court of the Poltava Region on 15.06.2017. Category: Tsivilni spravi. Subject I will call: the application of Zhurbi O.V. about the turn of the Avtozavod reshennya. r/s m. Kremenchuka po spravi za pozov Shibashovoi N.D. do Zhurbi O.V. pro pripinennya prava vlasnosti vnaslidok znishchennya maina ta usunennya pereshkoda u korostuvanni mainom. Pozivachem є – Shybashova Nina Dmytryvna.

Olha Vasylivna may the status of a borzhnik for the vikonavchym provadzhennya po tsiy spravi.

Taken from open source ZHURBA OLHA VASYLIVNA – YouControl

Supporting Information

Case No. 524/11436/14-ц

RESOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE

On 11.12.2014 the Judge of the Avtozavodskyi District Court of the city of Kremenchuk Zemtsov V.V., having considered the materials of the statement of claim of PERSON_1 to the Avtozavodsky bailiffs department of the Kremenchuk MUJ on exclusion from the act of inventory of property and release from arrest,

V S T A N O V I V:

The court received the said statement of claim.

However, a valid statement of claim was drawn up in violation of the requirements provided for in Art. Century. 119, 120 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine.

In accordance with Art. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, every person has the right, in accordance with the procedure established by this Code, to apply to the court for the protection of their violated, unrecognized or disputed rights, freedoms or interests.

The plaintiff did not specify what kind of property he wanted to exclude from the inventory report.

In such circumstances, the statement of claim should be left without action to eliminate these shortcomings.

Guided by Art. 119, 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine,

U X V A L I V:

A valid statement of claim shall be left without action. To provide the applicant with a period of 3 days from the date of receipt of this ruling by the plaintiff, warning that otherwise the statement of claim will be recognized as not filed and returned.

The ruling is not subject to appeal.

Referee:

Taken from open source Court Document — “41873288” — YouControl

Case No. 524/11436/14-ц

RESOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF UKRAINE

On 28.01.2015 the judge of the Avtozavodskyi District Court of the city of Kremenchuk, Poltava Oblast, PERSON_1, having considered the materials of the claim of PERSON_2 to the Avtozavodskyi Department of the State Bailiffs’ Service of the Kremenchuk City Department of Justice in Poltava Oblast on exclusion from the act of inventory of property and release from arrest,

INSTALLED:

In December 2014, PERSON_2 appealed to the court with the above-mentioned statement of claim.

By the judge’s ruling of 11.12.2014 the above-mentioned statement of claim was left without action.

The plaintiff was given a deadline to remedy the deficiencies. The requirements of the judge’s ruling of 11.12.2014 were not fulfilled by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff did not specify what kind of property he wanted to exclude from the inventory report.

Taking into account that without elimination of these shortcomings it is impossible to consider the statement of claim on the merits, guided by Art. 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine,

RULED:

To recognize the valid statement of claim of PERSON_2 to the Avtozavodskyi Department of the State Bailiffs’ Service of the Kremenchuk City Department of Justice in Poltava Oblast on exclusion from the act of inventory of property and release from arrest and return to the plaintiff.

Explain to the plaintiff that according to Part 5 of Art. 121 of the Code of Civil Procedure of Ukraine, the return of the statement of claim does not prevent the re-application to the court, if the circumstances that became the basis for the return of the statement cease to exist.

The ruling may be appealed through the Avtozavodsky District Court of Kremenchuk by filing an appeal within 5 days from the date of promulgation of the ruling. Persons who were not present at the announcement of the ruling have the right to file a complaint within five days from the date of its receipt.

Referee

Taken from open source Court Document — “42465028” — YouControl