“Another October, another October, and yet another October”: how the Kyiv Court of Appeal is stalling Yaroslavskyi’s case

“Another October, another October, and yet another October”: how the Kyiv Court of Appeal is stalling Yaroslavskyi’s case

The hearing in case No. 761/28820/23 at the Kyiv Court of Appeal, which concerns assets worth tens of millions of dollars, has effectively frozen. The next session was postponed again — this time until October.

This is reported in a piece citing the court register, Hromadske, and Politanalyz.

The core of the story begins in 2022, when an investigating judge of the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv imposed an arrest on 100% of the corporate rights of Credo Solutions LLC, prohibiting their alienation, use, and disposal.

In 8 May 2024 the Pecherskyi District Court of Kyiv annulled the transfer of those corporate rights to ARMA and handed them into the custody of the injured party — Ukrainian Metallurgical Company LLC. The company’s director is Oleksandr Sokolenko. According to the National Bank of Ukraine, UMC is part of the DCH group, whose ultimate beneficiary owner is listed as Oleksandr Yaroslavskyi.

The appeal against that Pecherskyi District Court decision has now been at the Kyiv Court of Appeal for more than a year. Hearings are being postponed, substantive consideration has essentially not progressed, and the next date again falls in October.

According to available data, the head of the Kyiv Court of Appeal, Yaroslav Holovachov, has led the institution since 2015. Hromadske and Politanalyz previously drew attention to the fact that his tenure exceeds the two three-year terms provided by law.

A separate issue is possible corrupt arrangements surrounding the case’s consideration. According to available information, Holovachov and the panel judges may be receiving up to $50 thousand per month for delaying the process. If this information is confirmed, it would no longer be just another postponed hearing but a possible systemic scheme to block the case’s consideration.

The situation with the court head’s assets is no less telling. According to Hromadske, Holovachov’s family uses elite real estate in Kyiv and premium-class cars with a combined value of about $3 million, while the family’s declared annual income is about 6 million UAH.

The pattern of delaying this case looks particularly striking against the backdrop of other high-profile proceedings involving Holovachov, including the case of the former head of the Medical-Social Expert Commission of Khmelnytskyi region, Tetiana Krupa.

The question remains simple: how many more times must the case be postponed until “the next October” before the Kyiv Court of Appeal finally hears it on the merits?