FEATURES OF APPLYING SEIZURE AS A TYPE OF INTERIM MEASURE IN COMMERCIAL PROCEEDINGS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32689/3083-7359.2026.2.19Keywords:
interim measures, securing a claim, balance of rights, proportionality, arrest of property, seizure of bank accounts, counter-security, special regime accountsAbstract
The article is devoted to a comprehensive academic and practical analysis of the seizure of property and bank accounts as an interim measure in Ukrainian commercial litigation. The relevance of the research stems from the necessity to establish a fair balance between creditor claims enforcement and safeguarding the debtor’s ownership rights against disproportionate restrictions. The author examines the classification of assets subject to seizure, the standard of proof regarding the risk of non-enforcement of a future court decision, and proportionality criteria. Special attention is paid to the systemic defect of blocking designated payroll and tax accounts by enforcement authorities during interim orders execution. Proposals to amend Article 137 of the Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine and strengthen the mandatory role of counter-security (Article 141) are scientifically substantiated.
References
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (1992), “Commercial Procedural Code of Ukraine”, Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, vol. 6, art. 56.
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (1996), “Constitution of Ukraine”, Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, vol. 30, art. 141.
Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine (2016), “On Enforcement Proceedings: Law of Ukraine”, Vidomosti Verkhovnoi Rady Ukrainy, vol. 30, art. 542.
Ministry of Justice of Ukraine (2012), “On Approval of the Instruction on the Organization of Forced Execution of Decisions: Order of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine No. 512/5”, Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy, vol. 28, art. 1047.
Fursa, S.Ya. (2013), “Some conceptual approaches to resolving the problems of foreclosure on the debtor's property in the enforcement process of Ukraine”, Visnyk Kyivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni Tarasa Shevchenka. Yurydychni nauky, vol. 4 (98), pp. 8–13.
Korolov, V.V. (2018), “Concept and types of securing a claim in judicial proceedings”, Yurydychna Ukraina, vol. 11, pp. 60–67.
Maliarchuk, L. (2019), “Legal essence of the arrest of the debtor's property during foreclosure”, Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo, vol. 11, pp. 43–47.
Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2022), “Resolution in case No. 908/2382/21 of June 17, 2022”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/105078266.
Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2025), “Resolution in case No. 759/22148/24 of August 06, 2025”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/129582421.
Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2024), “Resolution in case No. 902/611/22 of February 29, 2024”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/117373712.
Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2025), “Resolution in case No. 752/22157/20 of July 30, 2025”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/129213145.
Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2021), “Resolution in case No. 911/8/21 of May 17, 2021”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/96977419.
International Labour Organization (1949), “Protection of Wages Convention No. 95”, Ofitsiinyi visnyk Ukrainy, 2006, vol. 35, art. 1520.
Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2023), “Resolution in case No. 911/2797/22 of July 28, 2023”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/112484301.
Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court (2024), “Resolution in case No. 902/831/23 of December 25, 2024”, Unified State Register of Court Decisions, available at: https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/124199153.
