In Odessa, the prosecutor's office lost a court case regarding land under a hotel on Lidersky Street

The Odesa Regional Prosecutor’s Office lost a court case regarding the termination of lease agreements and the return to the city of plots on Lidersky Boulevard, where a hotel was built in place of tennis courts. The court found that the developers acted on the basis of permits issued by the city council.

This is stated in the decision of the Odesa Regional Commercial Court dated October 19. 

The claim was dismissed in its entirety. 

The court concluded that the issuance of urban planning conditions and permits by the executive bodies of the Odesa City Council indicates the landowner’s de facto approval of the construction.

In addition, the court noted that terminating the contracts and demanding that the plots be restored to their original condition is impossible because the complex has already been built. In the court’s view, this would upset the balance of interests between the parties. 

The case concerned two land plots on Leaders Boulevard, Nos. 7 and 9 (with areas of 0.6 hectares and 0.0724 hectares, respectively), which the Odesa City Council initially leased to Sport-Service LLC and Leader-Park LLC for the maintenance of administrative buildings and tennis courts. Subsequently, with the participation of “Odesabud” LLC, construction began on the site of a hotel with a tourist center, a sports club, and a rehabilitation center.

The deputy head of the Odesa Regional Prosecutor’s Office filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Odesa City Council, demanding that the lease agreements be terminated, the right to conduct construction work be revoked, and the companies be required to return the plots to the city in their original condition. According to the prosecutors, the new construction violated the original lease terms and the designated use of the land.

The defendants contested the lawsuit, emphasizing that they had obtained all necessary urban planning conditions and restrictions from the Odesa City Council’s Department of Architecture and Urban Planning, as well as a construction permit from the State Architectural and Construction Inspection (DABI).

According to the ruling, the court proceedings in the case have been ongoing since 2022. The case reached the appellate court twice, and the Supreme Court remanded it for a new trial to thoroughly review the violations. 

Юлія Калабайда