On 15 October, the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine filed a petition to the Kyiv Economic Court about enforced recovery from PAT Gazprom of penalty, penalty tax and obligation to comply with Committee’s decisions about the termination of the violation.

Review meeting on the law case took place on 15 October.

At the hearing the representatives of PAT Gazprom made an application about hearing of a case in private. They gave as a reason that during the pendency of the case in point, the circumstances of taking a decision by the AMCU on abuse of the market dominance position at the market of services for the transit of natural gas by PAT Gazprom will be investigated, and as a proof of the plea of this decision nullity, the company will provide the documents, which are confidential.

Besides, the representatives of PAT Gazprom put in to the court a request for subpoena PAT NAK Naftogaz Ukraiina and PAT Ukrtransgaz on the defendant’s side as non-party interveners with a view to dispute.

But, as the subject of the claim in this case is to recover from the defendant the amounts of penalty and penalty tax, so a decision in the case can not affect the rights and obligations of PAT NAK Naftogaz Ukraiina and PAT Ukrtransgaz as the parties in this case.

Also, as of 31/10/2016, the court found that in the case file the documents containing state, commercial or banking secrecy are missing.

For these reasons, the Kyiv Economic Court has reached the conclusion about the refusal of the Committee’s petition about hearing of a case in private and bringing to the case of PAT NAK Naftogaz Ukraiina and PAT Ukrtransgaz as a third party.

With that, the representatives of PAT Gazprom made an application for appointment the collegial investigation of the case, alleging as a reason that this case come under the collegial investigation by category and complexity, taking into account the amount in dispute and the considerable volume of the legislation of Ukraine that may be necessary to investigate for the right settlement of the dispute.

The court established that the representatives of the company didn’t give reasons in a proper manner in what particularly the defendant sees the complexity of the case, and, besides, the court hasn’t even started the consideration of this case on the merits. So, the court dismissed the application as it is premature and groundless.

The next meeting of the Kyiv Economic Court on this case will take place on 21 November.

Recomended Posts

Leave a Reply