Interim measures in corporate disputes in Ukraine

The execution of any court decision is an integral stage of the justice process and, therefore, must meet the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The ECHR, in its judgment of 19.03.1997 in the case of Hornsby v. Greece, stated that the execution of a judgment rendered by any court should be regarded as an integral part of the trial. At the same time, judicial protection, as well as the activities of the court, cannot be considered effective if court decisions are not enforced or are enforced improperly and without the court's control over their execution.

In the judgment of the ECHR of 18.05.2004 in the case of Prodan v. Moldova, the Court emphasized that the right to a fair trial guaranteed by the Convention would be an illusion if the legal system of the states that have ratified the Convention allows a final, binding judgment to remain unenforced, causing prejudice to one of the parties.

Thus, the interim measures taken by the court help to guarantee the restoration of the plaintiff's violated rights in case of satisfaction of the claim and enforcement of the court decision, which is fully consistent with the ECHR case law. The economic court should consider the potential risks of nonenforcement of the court decision and guarantee the restoration of the plaintiff's violated rights in case of satisfaction of the claim and enforcement of the court decision.