Results of consideration an administrative case on recognition of inaction of the State Architectural and Construction Inspectorate of Ukraine unlawful
Judges’ panel of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal considered appeals of an individual, the State Architectural and Construction Inspectorate of Ukraine, LLC “BMU-53” on the decision of the first instance court dated February 20, 2020 in an administrative case No. 320/3942/19.
The individual filed a suit to the State Architectural and Construction Inspectorate of Ukraine with a request to rule actions as illegal and obligate to do certain actions, namely:
- declare such inaction of the defendant on being without responding to reports about the violation of the legislation’s requirements in the field of urban planning, building codes, standards and rules unlawful, that it turned out, including in particular, in not conducting an unscheduled inspection of this violation and not issuing an order to eliminate it;
- declare a certificate issuing of facility readiness to operation activity unlawful;
- obligate a defendant, during 5 working days, from the date of entry into force of court decision to decline a certificate on facility readiness in Boryspil city, Robitnycha st., 3,5,7,9,11,13 to operation, to make an unscheduled inspection of this facility on the results of which issue a binding order on eliminating of legal requirements violetions in the field of urban planning, building codes, standards, also issue an order to stop building activity until this violation is eliminated.
Third parties who did not declare independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute in this case are LLC "BMU-53" and the Boryspil City Council.
The first instance court upheld the claim partially, declared the inaction of the State Architectural and Construction Inspectorate of Ukraine unlawful, and rejected the other part of the claim. Disagreeing with the decision of the first instance court the defendant and LLC “BMU-53” filed appeals.
Judges’ panel of the Sixth Administrative Court of Appeal did not satisfy the appeals and leave unchanged the decision of the first instance court from February 20,2020.