Demolition or Dismantling? Which decision may be made by a local council, and which – by a Court?
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.)
📌 On the Excessiveness of the Demand for Demolition of Unauthorized Construction)
Who Is Authorized to Decide on Dismantling and Demolition?
A clear answer to this question can be found in judicial practice.
The Supreme Court, represented by the panel of judges of the Cassation Administrative Court, in its Ruling of May 26, 2025, in case No. 160/2346/21, reached the following conclusions:
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.
You may discuss the referenced Supreme Court ruling in the Urban Planning in Ukraine group.
Ⓒ 2025