On 13 November 2024, the Second Senate commenced deliberation of the case upon the constitutional complaint of AEROC Investment Deutschland GmbH (hereinafter, the “Company”) in the public part of the plenary session in the form of written proceedings.
During the plenary session, the judge-rapporteur in the case, Oleg Pervomayskyi, outlined the content of the constitutional complaint and the complainant's arguments.
As the judge-rapporteur noted, the subject of constitutional review in this case is Articles 4.1.1, 4.1.11, 51.1.1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Sanctions” No. 1644-VI dated 14 August 2014 as amended by the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on Improving the Effectiveness of Sanctions Related to the Assets of Individuals” No. 2257-IX dated 12 May 2022 (hereinafter, “Law No. 1644 as amended by Law No. 2257”), as well as Article 2831.1.1, 2831.2 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine as amended by Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine on the Application of Sanctions” No. 3223-IX dated 13 July 2023 (hereinafter, the “Code as amended by Law No. 3223”).
According to Article 4.1 of Law No. 1644 as amended by Law No. 2257, the types of sanctions under Law No. 1644 include, inter alia:
- “blocking of assets - temporary deprivation of the right to use and dispose of assets belonging to an individual or legal entity, as well as assets in respect of which such a person may directly or indirectly (through other individuals or legal entities) perform actions identical in content to the exercise of the right to dispose of them” (paragraph 1);
- “recovery of assets belonging to an individual or legal entity, as well as assets in respect of which such a person may directly or indirectly (through other individuals or legal entities) perform actions identical in content to the exercise of the right to dispose of them” (paragraph 11).
The provisions of Article 2831.2 of the Code as amended by Law No. 3223 provide, in particular:
- “within five days from the date of receipt of the statement of claim, the person in respect of whom the issue of imposing a sanction under of Article 4.1.11 of the Law of Ukraine “On Sanctions” is raised, has the right to file a response to the statement of claim”.
The judge informed that in 2023, the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (hereinafter, the “Ministry of Justice”) filed a lawsuit with the High Anti-Corruption Court (hereinafter, the “HCAC”) against Public Joint Stock Company LSR Group (hereinafter, the “Company”) with the participation of third parties who do not claim independent claims regarding the subject matter of the dispute, on behalf of the defendant, the Company, a citizen of the Russian Federation, Andriy Molchanov, Aeroc Limited Liability Company (hereinafter, the “Aeroc LLC”), with a request, in particular, to impose on PJSC LSR Group the sanction established by Article 4.1.11 of Law No. 1644 and to recover assets for the benefit of the state, namely 100 per cent of the share of the authorised capital of Aeroc LLC in the amount determined by the authorised capital held by the Company, in respect of which PJSC LSR Group exercises rights identical in content to the right of disposal.
The HCAC upheld the Ministry of Justice's claim: it imposed a sanction on LSR Group PJSC set out in Article 4.1.11 of Law No. 1644; and recovered 100 per cent of the share of the charter capital of Aerok LLC, in respect of which LSR Group PJSC, through the Company, may perform actions identical in content to the right of disposal, for the benefit of the state.
Disagreeing with the decision of the HACC, the Company appealed against it. The panel of judges of the HACC Appeals Chamber dismissed the Company's appeal and upheld the HACC decision.
During the plenary session, the judge also informed that in order to ensure an objective and complete deliberation of the case and to ensure that the Court delivers a reasoned decision, letters of inquiry were sent to the President of Ukraine, the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the Vice Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine - Minister of Justice of Ukraine, as well as a number of higher education and research establishments on the issues raised in the constitutional complaint.
The Court examined the case file and proceeded to the in-camera part of the plenary session to deliver its decision.
The public part of the plenary session was attended by the Permanent Representative of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine at the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Maksym Dyrdin.
The video recording of the plenary session is available on the official website of the Court in the section “Archive of Video Broadcasts of Sessions”.
(from left to right)
