The Committee on Legal Policy has reconsidered Draft Law No. 11533 “On Amendments to the Civil Code of Ukraine and Certain Other Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Specifics of Providing Information from Public Electronic Registers Maintained by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine and Certain Other Public Electronic Registers” and adopted a decision to recommend that the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, based on the results of the first reading, adopt the above-mentioned draft law as a basis and as a whole in the version proposed by the Committee.
The document proposes amendments to the Civil Code of Ukraine and a number of Ukrainian laws, in particular:
the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Property Rights to Immovable Property and Their Encumbrances”,
the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Associations”,
the Law of Ukraine “On the Protection of Rights to Inventions and Utility Models”,
the Law of Ukraine “On the Protection of Rights to Industrial Designs”,
the Law of Ukraine “On the Protection of Rights to Trademarks for Goods and Services”,
the Law of Ukraine “On the Protection of Rights to Layout Designs of Semiconductor Products”,
the Law of Ukraine “On Public Electronic Registers”,
the Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights”.
which restricts access of individuals and legal entities to information from electronic registers regarding defense enterprises during the period of martial law in Ukraine, introduced by the Presidential Decree No. 64/2022 dated February 24, 2022 “On the Introduction of Martial Law in Ukraine”, and for one year after its termination or cancellation.
According to the authors of the draft law, the implementation of the proposed amendments will contribute to enhancing the security of defense enterprises by limiting the possibility of free and unrestricted access to registry data about defense companies, their types of activities, locations, as well as temporarily restricting access to the location of real estate owned by such enterprises and to data on intellectual property objects related to national security and defense. The goal is to preserve the integrity of such registers while imposing minimal access restrictions for individuals and legal entities.
However, it is important not to overlook the significance and impact of open data, which includes information from public registers. This concerns journalistic investigations, public oversight of politicians, and various projects that rely on public registry data (in particular, the URBANDATAproject).
Given that, for example, information in the Unified State Electronic System in the Field of Construction (USESFC) concerning defense enterprises and others connected directly or indirectly to the military and defense sectors is non-public (i.e., closed), a temporary restriction on access to similar data in state registers appears entirely justified in my opinion.
What is essential, however, is that access to the entire body or a substantial portion of registry data — especially from the State Register of Real Property Rights and the State Land Cadastre — is not “accidentally” restricted.
The closure of public registers not only creates challenges for citizens but also opens up vast opportunities for corruption. That is why any restrictions must be clearly defined and legally justified.
In my view, draft law No. 11533 is likely to be adopted, but the final version of the document will partly depend on public engagement and advocacy.
The referenced decision of the Supreme Court can be discussed in the groupUrban Planning in Ukraine.
This issue frequently arises in the context of land and urban planning disputes. It becomes particularly relevant in cases involving unauthorized construction, installation of temporary structures, garages, kiosks, or other objects placed without legal documentation.
In this article, we will clarify which decisions – regarding dismantling or demolition – may be made by a city or village council within the scope of its powers (as a public authority), and in which cases a court decision is required. We will examine key provisions of Ukrainian legislation as well as the case law of the Supreme Court.
This material will be useful for legal professionals, developers, local government representatives, and property owners.
Terminology
At first glance, the difference between “dismantling” and “demolition” may seem purely terminological. However, when property is involved, the distinction becomes more significant – and even more so when we are dealing with compulsory dismantling or demolition, where multiple legal nuances must be considered. That is precisely where we will begin.
We will not examine the general meanings of the terms “dismantling” and “demolition” here, since in practice both refer to the process by which a structure is physically removed.
Instead, the focus of this article is on property – specifically, real estate objects or temporary buildings and structures – since decisions by local governments and courts most often pertain to these. We are discussing forced dismantling or demolition as a consequence of legal violations by the owner of a given object.
As a rule, the term “dismantling” is used in regulations related to temporary buildings and structures. For instance, it appears in the Order No. 244 of October 21, 2011, “On the Approval of the Procedure for the Placement of Temporary Structures for Business Activity”.
Additionally, since the onset of russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, new regulations have introduced provisions on “the dismantling of buildings damaged or destroyed as a result of emergencies, hostilities, or terrorist acts” – such as the Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 474 of April 19, 2022, “On Approval of the Procedure for Performing Dismantling Works on Buildings Damaged or Destroyed Due to Emergencies, Hostilities, or Acts of Terrorism.”
According to Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 474, dismantling is defined as a specific type of construction activity carried out on damaged or destroyed structures for the purpose of removing all or part of their structural elements.
In contrast, demolition is typically referenced in cases of unauthorized (self-willed) construction. For example, Article 376 of the Civil Code of Ukraine states: “A residential building, structure, facility, or other immovable property is considered unauthorized construction if it has been built or is being built on land not allocated for that purpose, without the proper authorization to carry out construction work or without an approved project, or in significant violation of building codes and regulations”.
Even based on the context in which the legislature uses each term, we can draw a clear distinction:
Dismantling generally applies to temporary structures or objects damaged or destroyed due to emergencies, hostilities, or acts of terrorism.
Demolition, on the other hand, pertains to immovable property and is more commonly associated with legal responses to violations such as unauthorized construction.
(At this point, we will not go into the separate legal treatment of cases where an object has not been officially commissioned or registered.)
According to Part 3 of Article 41 of the Constitution of Ukraine, no one shall be unlawfully deprived of the right of ownership. The right to private property is inviolable.
These constitutional provisions are elaborated, in particular, in Article 319 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, which guarantees that the owner possesses, uses, and disposes of their property at their own discretion and has the right to perform with their property any actions that do not contradict the law and conform to the moral principles of society. The state shall not interfere with the exercise of the right of ownership by the owner, but the owner’s activities may be restricted or terminated in cases and in the manner prescribed by law.
Decisive for determining whether the respondent (i.e., the public authority — in this case, the city council) has the authority to adopt a decision on the dismantling and demolition of property is whether the respective property is classified as immovable property or as a temporary structure. Accordingly, the disputed objects must first be identified on-site.
According to Part Two of Article 28 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Regulation of Urban Development Activities”, a temporary structure for commercial, domestic, social, cultural, or other purposes intended for entrepreneurial activity is defined as a single-storey structure made of lightweight constructions, taking into account the basic requirements for structures as defined by the technical regulation of construction products, buildings, and structures. It is installed temporarily without the construction of a foundation. A temporary structure for entrepreneurial activity may include an enclosed space for the temporary presence of people (a pavilion with a maximum area of 30 square meters by the external perimeter) or may lack such a space.
According to Part One of Article 5 of the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Property Rights to Immovable Property and Their Encumbrances”, property rights and their encumbrances are subject to registration in the State Register of Rights for land plots, as well as for immovable property objects located on a land plot, the relocation of which is impossible without their depreciation or change of intended purpose. Such objects include enterprises as single property complexes, residential buildings, structures, buildings, and their separate parts, apartments, residential and non-residential premises.
According to the provisions of Article 181 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, Article 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Mortgage”, and Article 1 of the Law of Ukraine “On State Registration of Property Rights to Immovable Property and Their Encumbrances”, a set of qualifying characteristics for immovable property is established.
Thus, pursuant to Article 181 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, immovable things (immovable property, real estate) include land plots as well as objects located on a land plot that cannot be moved without being devalued or having their intended purpose changed.
According to Part Two of the same article, movable things are those that can be freely moved in space.
Therefore, unlike immovable property, which cannot be relocated without devaluation or a change in its intended use, temporary structures differ in that they are typically made of lightweight prefabricated constructions and are installed without deep foundations, among other distinctions.
According to Article 38 of the Law of Ukraine “On Regulation of Urban Development Activities”, in the event of unauthorized construction of an object, where reconstruction to eliminate significant deviations from the project or to rectify violations of the legal rights and interests of other persons or substantial violations of construction regulations is not feasible, an official of the state architectural and construction control authority shall issue an order to the person who carried out (or is carrying out) such construction, requiring the elimination of violations of urban development legislation, building regulations, state standards, and rules, specifying a timeframe for voluntary compliance with the order. If the person fails to comply with the requirements set out in the order within the specified period, the state architectural and construction control authority shall file a claim with the court seeking the demolition of the unauthorized construction and compensation for the associated demolition costs.
Based on the content of the above legislative provisions, it follows that the procedure and the implementation of powers by an authority in relation to the dismantling of a temporary structure depend on the type of object subject to dismantling.
📌 A public authority is authorized to make decisions on the dismantling of objects if such objects qualify as temporary structures within the meaning of the Local Improvement Rules.
📌 If the object does not constitute a temporary structure, it may be subject to compulsory demolition pursuant to the procedure established by the Law of Ukraine “On Regulation of Urban Development Activities” and only on the basis of a court decision issued upon the claim of the state architectural and construction control authority.
A similar conclusion was reached in the rulings of the Supreme Court dated January 27, 2020 in case No. 465/249/15-a, dated March 13, 2020 in case No. 161/14543/16-a, and dated April 13, 2022 in case No. 852/2a-1/19.
The draft law was prepared in implementation of the twelfth paragraph of subparagraph 1 of paragraph 5 of Section XII “Final and Transitional Provisions” of the Law of Ukraine “On Preschool Education” and in accordance with item 1.29 of the Action Plan for the preparation of acts and performance of other tasks required for the implementation of Law No. 3788-IX. These provisions require the submission to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine of a draft law introducing effective mechanisms for ensuring pedestrian accessibility to preschool education institutions during urban development, in particular by prohibiting the commissioning of multi-apartment residential buildings without the prior or simultaneous commissioning of preschool institutions within walking distance, and by establishing the inevitability of liability for officials who commission such buildings in violation of the statutory pedestrian accessibility requirements for preschool institutions.
According to the explanatory note, the draft act proposes amendments to the Laws of Ukraine “On Liability for Offenses in the Field of Urban Development,” “On Comprehensive Reconstruction of Quarters (Microdistricts) of Obsolete Housing Stock,” “On Regulation of Urban Development Activities,” “On Guaranteeing Property Rights to Real Estate Objects to Be Constructed in the Future,” and “On Local Self-Government in Ukraine” in the following areas:
establishing liability for urban development offenses committed by urban development entities performing construction works;
prohibition of including a preschool educational institution in the last construction phase/start-up complex, except in cases where this phase/complex also includes another object, if the design documentation provides for phased construction and includes a preschool educational institution as part of the construction project;
assigning delegated powers to the executive bodies of village, township, and city councils to carry out, in the prescribed manner, state control over compliance with legislation and approved urban planning documentation during the planning and development of respective territories;
suspension, in cases provided by law, of construction carried out in violation of urban planning documentation and design specifications of individual objects (including the construction of educational institutions as provided for in the construction design documentation), as well as construction that may cause harm to the natural environment;
in the event of announcing a competition to attract investor-developers for the implementation of housing reconstruction or replacement projects, the local self-government body must adopt a decision specifying, in particular, the investor-developer’s involvement in the development of the engineering, transportation, and social infrastructure of the development area (including the provision of preschool educational institutions within walking distance);
designation in detailed plans and development projects of preschool educational institutions, within the areas subject to the reconstruction or replacement of obsolete housing stock, with due regard to pedestrian accessibility (if necessary).
In particular, the Draft Law “On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Introduction of Mechanisms to Ensure Pedestrian Accessibility to Preschool Educational Institutions During the Development of Territories” provides for the following provision:
“If the design documentation for construction provides for stages and/or start-up complexes and includes a preschool educational institution as part of the construction project, it is prohibited to include the preschool educational institution in the final stage/start-up complex, except where another facility is also included in this stage/start-up complex.”
“It shall be established that the provisions of Part Thirteen of Article 31 of this Law (referring to the Law of Ukraine ‘On Regulation of Urban Development Activities’) do not apply to design documentation for construction projects for which the right to perform construction works was obtained prior to the entry into force of the Law of Ukraine ‘On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine Regarding the Introduction of Mechanisms to Ensure Pedestrian Accessibility to Preschool Educational Institutions During the Development of Territories’. Any amendment to such design documentation aimed at altering the construction sequence by assigning the preschool educational institution to the final stage/start-up complex of the construction project shall be prohibited, unless another facility is also included in that stage/start-up complex.”
The draft law also contains a provision amending the Law of Ukraine “On the Guarantee of Real Property Rights to Real Estate Objects to Be Constructed in the Future”, which requires that the developer, the construction customer, and the manager of the construction financing fund (if applicable), in cases where the construction of a real estate object (a multi-apartment residential building) is carried out with the involvement of non-governmental funds (directly or indirectly) from individuals or legal entities—including under management arrangements—for the subsequent acquisition by such persons of ownership rights to the respective real estate objects, must publish on their official websites the following information:whether or not the construction project includes social infrastructure facilities (including preschool educational institutions that provide access to early childhood education).
