The Kyiv Court of Appeal, having considered the written procedure, appealed the appeal filed by Femida Legal Association in favor of PJSC “Insurance Company” U.B.I. CO-OP “, partially satisfied it and rejected the claimant in recovering from the company insurance indemnity and litigation costs. Also, the court additionally recovered the costs of legal aid from PERSON_1.
THE COURSE OF THE CASE (c/c 761/22792/17)
It is often the case that the parties, despite the existence of a court decision in the case concerning certain relationships, try to re-apply to the court with the same lawsuits. For such “clever” even in the Code of Conduct, responsibility was introduced. But how should one deal with the fact that the court ignores such violations and does not carry out actions stipulated by the procedural law and still resolve the dispute in essence … and moreover, it satisfies it… In this case, the lawyers of Femida Legal Association protected the interests of PJSC “Insurance Group”U.B.I. CO-OP” in a dispute with a person regarding the collection of funds under a contract of voluntary liability insurance of owners of land transport vehicles. A person appealed to the Shevchenkivsky District Court of Kyiv with a claim for the collection of funds from our Client under the specified insurance contract, while referring as a basis for a decision in another case between the same parties, which came into force, and which in this part in the satisfaction of the claim was denied. Despite repeated appeals from the Respondent on the closure of the proceedings, the court decided on the merits and satisfied the claim by completely ignoring the decision in another case that came into force and the dispute has already been resolved.
Due to a number of rather strange procedural violations, the defendant received a court decision after it was legally valid, but at the same time on April 04, the Kyiv Court of Appeal restored the fairness of the case and reversed the decision of the court of first instance and adopted a new one which refused to satisfy the claim with reference to the fact that the specified dispute has already been settled in another case.