Company connected to Vladyslava Molchanova is trying to obtain land in Kyiv’s historic center through the courts

A company connected to Vladyslava Molchanova is attempting to obtain land in the historic center of Kyiv through the courts.

The fate of a land plot on Mykhailivska Street in the capital is being decided, 18, 18-V. LLC “Stolitsia,” which owns nonresidential buildings located on this land, is trying in court to “force” the Kyiv City Council to sign a lease agreement for this land.

This was reported by the publication KyivVlada.

The company, which is part of the circle surrounding the notorious developer Vladyslava Molchanova (pictured on the right in the collage), says that the city authorities have not adopted a draft decision on this land allocation for five years, which they claim is illegal. In fact, that draft decision was already “rejected” at the outset by the city council’s lawyers, because the territory in question is within protection zones (including the historic area of UNESCO’s buffer zone), and the buildings located there are designated as cultural heritage objects. Nevertheless, this document was put before the council’s deputies for consideration in May 2023; the vote failed. That did not prevent the Kyiv City Council last year from obtaining a court ruling ordering “Stolitsia” to pay more than 6 million hryvnias—funds the LLC had not paid to the city budget due to the lack of formalized lease relations for the land. Whether this will ultimately help “Stolitsia” obtain the desired land allocation through the courts remains to be seen.

A hearing in the Northern Commercial Court of Appeal for case No. 910/439/26 is scheduled for 26 November 2026 year.

A panel of judges is to consider LLC “Stolitsia”’s appeal against the decision of the Commercial Court of Kyiv dated 17 June 2026 year, which denied the company’s claim. The business entity demanded that the court recognize as concluded a lease agreement for a plot of 0,31 hectares on Mykhailivska Street, 18, 18-V in the Shevchenkivskyi district of Kyiv.

Background

As early as 30 September 2021 year, LLC “Stolitsia” applied to the Kyiv City Council with a request to formalize the right to use a plot on Mykhailivska Street, 18, 18-V. Almost a month later, on 22 October, then–deputy head of the Kyiv City State Administration (KSCA) for self-government powers, Petro Olenych, and the KSCA Department of Land Resources registered draft decision No. 08/231-3819/PR in the city council regarding the lease of this land to the company.

The document specified that the plot has cadastral number 8000000000:82:013:0006, and LLC “Stolitsia” plans to lease it for 10 years for the operation and maintenance of two nonresidential buildings (purpose – “for construction and maintenance of administrative buildings, office buildings of companies engaged in entrepreneurial activities aimed at generating profit”). The draft decision also stated that, according to Kyiv’s General Plan, functionally this land belongs to the territory of medium- and low-rise residential development. The draft noted that two nonresidential buildings with a total area of 2,4 thousand sq. m. stand on the land, owned by LLC “Stolitsia.”

Later, on 28 September 2022 year, the document was effectively “rejected” by the Legal Support Department of the city council—the lawyers returned it without approval. The reason was that both the land plot and the buildings on it have protected status.

The city council’s legal department noted that on 13 September 2021 year the Ministry of Culture and Information Policy informed the municipal authorities that the land is located in Kyiv’s historic area, within the buffer zone of the World Heritage Site “Kyiv: Saint Sophia Cathedral and Related Monastic Buildings, Kyiv–Pechersk Lavra,” and on the territory of the nationally significant archaeological monument “Cultural layer of the City of Yaroslav.”

According to the lawyers, the Ministry of Culture also stated that the building on Mykhailivska Street, 18, is registered as a newly discovered cultural heritage object—pursuant to the order of the Main Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage of the KSCA dated 25 June 2011 year. In light of these facts, the legal department believes that any works in this area, among other things, must be carried out only after coordination with cultural heritage protection authorities and with notification of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee.

Among other points, Kyiv council lawyers noted that the KSCA Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage specified in a letter regarding this draft decision that the land contains the Kyiv cultural heritage object “City Manor.” Its composition includes a revenue house (Mykhailivska Street, 18), which housed the Kyiv Real School in 1873–1877 years, as well as a residential wing (same address) and a service wing (Mykhailivska Street, 18-B).

The legal opinion also stated that “as seen from the materials of the draft decision, works had already been carried out on the buildings, following which the buildings’ area changed.” The lawyers did not specify what exactly LLC “Stolitsia” might have violated in this regard—possibly this relates to officials recording three buildings on the land while the draft decision mentioned only two. In any case, this factor was one of the reasons the relevant department refused to approve the draft decision.

Subsequently, the draft decision was included on the agenda of a Kyiv City Council plenary session scheduled for 18 May 2023 year. In practice, the document was considered by the deputies only on 20 June of the same year, and there were not enough votes to approve it—the vote in favor was cast by 54 deputies, with a required minimum of 61 votes.

In particular, council deputy Ksenia Semenova (Servant of the People faction) spoke against approving the draft decision during that session. Among other things, she pointed out that the document contains no information on whether the building owner intends to carry out restoration (which in the capital is often the way actual new construction is formalized). She also noted the absence of data on whether LLC “Stolitsia” has signed a protection agreement for these buildings with cultural heritage authorities. Such an agreement records on paper the specific usage regime of the monument, the types and terms of restoration, conservation, and repair works, etc.

“This draft decision gives the building owner the opportunity to continue destroying it. A signed protection agreement protects a building with protected status from destruction. It is not difficult to [conclude such an agreement],” Ksenia Semenova said.

Interestingly, during that plenary session neither the head of the Kyiv City Council commission on urban planning, architecture, and land relations, Mykhailo Terentiev (UDAR faction), nor the director of the KSCA Department of Land Resources, Valentyna Pelykh, could answer Semenova about the presence or absence of such a protection agreement. Terentiev claimed that the draft decision had been approved by a letter from the Department for the Protection of Cultural Heritage dated 2021 year. That was likely a manipulation—he probably meant the very document mentioned by the city council lawyers and referenced in their comments.

At the same time, Kyiv City Council deputy Denys Moskal (All-Ukrainian Union “Fatherland” faction) said he supported the land allocation. His arguments were simple: the buildings were not under threat of collapse, and formalizing lease relations would allow the city budget to receive revenue.

“I often walk in that area. I don’t know whether there is a [protection] agreement or not—that’s not my personal concern. But the premises are in exemplary condition. They are not falling apart. And if entrepreneurs are willing to pay 4 million hryvnias [annually] in rent, we should carry them on our hands, not create artificial obstacles,” Denys Moskal said.

In the end, the vote on the draft decision failed. Mykhailo Terentiev called on the deputies to return to the issue, but that proposal did not receive the required number of votes.

At the same time, the NGO Mapa Renovatsii opposed this land allocation. Activists from that organization pointed out that the land could be used for “construction and maintenance of administrative buildings,” rather than for their “operation and maintenance,” as stated.

Later, in May 2025 year, the Kyiv City Council filed a claim with the Commercial Court of Kyiv seeking to recover 6,2 million hryvnias from LLC “Stolitsia.” The claim concerned unjustifiably retained funds—i.e., funds the company did not pay to the city budget as rent from the moment the plot on Mykhailivska Street, 18, 18-V, was formed and registered with the StateGeoCadastre. That occurred in July 2021, and according to the city’s calculations “Stolitsia” did not pay rent through March 2025. Subsequently, on 30 September last year, the commercial court fully satisfied the Kyiv City Council’s claims. To date that court decision has not been appealed.

LLC “Stolitsia” filed the above-mentioned suit seeking that the Kyiv City Council conclude a lease agreement for the plot at the address in question in January 2026. The company said the city council had not adopted a decision on the land allocation, although the corresponding draft decision had existed for a long time. They claimed that in response to “Stolitsia”’s inquiry (sent in December 2025) the city council did not provide information on when the document would be approved. The LLC emphasized that the council not only has the right to carry out this land allocation, but is obliged to do so under the law when the plot contains immovable property belonging to the prospective tenant.

In response, Kyiv City Council lawyers told the court that the claim did not prove or substantiate that the plot size indicated by “Stolitsia” corresponds to the size of the immovable property. The council also argued that it has a heavy workload, which among other things was why it had not adopted a decision on the land allocation. The city council said that transferring municipal land into lease is the exclusive competence of the local self-government body, and the absence of a council decision makes it impossible to conclude a lease and therefore prevents a court from recognizing a lease as concluded. Granting the claim, therefore, would amount to the court usurping the powers of the local self-government body. The municipality also emphasized that there are restrictions on the use of the disputed land, since the plot is within the protection zone around a cultural heritage object and contains regime-forming objects.

Ultimately, as noted above, the Kyiv City Council’s arguments were more persuasive to Commercial Court of Kyiv judge Oksana Blazhivska.

What is known about “Stolitsia”

According to the analytical system YouControl, LLC “Stolitsia” was registered in Kyiv in October 2002. Currently the company’s registered address is Mykhailivska Street, 18. Its director is Serhiy Horetskyi; the founders are LLC KUA “Business-Harant” (acting in the interests of the venture funds “Alkor” and “Sirius”), venture fund “Sargas,” and Cyprus companies C.G. Stolitsa Limited and Elacol Developments Limited. The ultimate beneficiaries of LLC “Stolitsia” are Kyiv resident Ivan Molchanov (pictured on the left in the collage) and three Lithuanian citizens—Agnė Ruzgyene, Raimondas Tumenas, and Maryna Pozniakova.

YouControl’s system indicates that LLC “Stolitsia” is part of the BT INVEST group of companies and the Vladyslava Molchanova family group of companies.

The first group unites a little under one hundred Ukrainian enterprises engaged in managing development and retail projects. In Ukraine BT INVEST operates the Novus retail chain, Best Imports (which imports goods for that chain), and the developer Stolitsa Group. Key figures in this group are the aforementioned Tumenas, Pozniakova, and Ruzgyene.

The group of companies associated with Vladyslava Molchanova includes around eighty business entities operating in construction and real estate. YouControl identifies the developer Stolitsa Group—co-founded by Molchanova—as the main asset of this group. The link between LLC “Stolitsia” and this group is suggested by a simple fact—the co-owner of that company, Ivan Molchanov, is Vladyslava Molchanova’s son. Previously, various sources named Molchanova a key financial donor to the Kyiv office of the All-Ukrainian Union “Fatherland” party, which, among others, helped elect the above-mentioned city council deputy Denys Moskal.

Stolitsa Group is one of Kyiv’s largest developers and is preparing to develop new large areas in the capital. Such activity by companies often leads to scandals.

Most of this developer’s complexes have been and are being built in the Vinogradar area of the capital—based on investment agreements concluded with the state enterprise ND VA “Pushcha-Vodytsia” (agro-combine “Pushcha-Vodytsia”). As a result, residential complexes such as “Varshavskyi,” “Varshavskyi-2,” “Varshavskyi-3,” and “Varshavskyi Plus” are being built there. The National Police previously had many questions about these developments due to the questionable nature of the investment agreements. Also frequently in the spotlight is the H2O residential complex, which Stolitsa Group is building in the Osokorky area—this project was “taken over” from the bankrupt Arkada Bank and the developer has for a long time been unable to complete it for various reasons.

In addition, the Kyiv Administrative Court has for almost two years been unable to issue a decision in a case challenging the Detailed Plan of the territory (DPT) for part of the Voskresenskyi industrial district, which the Kyiv City Council approved in May 2023 year in the interests of JSC Kyivmetal, which is in Vladyslava Molchanova’s orbit. The city prosecutor’s office insists on canceling this document, in part because it alters the provisions of the current General Plan, which is contrary to the law.

The issue concerns the fact that the city authorities effectively “converted” an industrial zone of 12,61 hectares (the land user is the same Kyivmetal), which is also located within the sanitary protection zone of a railway station, into an area for residential development. Thus the company effectively obtained the right to erect 8 residential “high-rises” (of 26 floors each). Some experts believe potential developers deliberately delay the court dispute to have time to “build out as much as possible” and then “use” the residents of the new buildings against law enforcement. Supporting this version is the fact that while the case was “lying in court,” Kyivmetal obtained a number of permits and began works.

One of the most high-profile stories involving companies linked to Vladyslava Molchanova occurred in early September 2025 year. At that time NABU and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office notified the developer, her business partner—the controversial ex-MP from the Party of Regions Yuriy Ivanyushchenko—and others of suspicions in a case concerning possible schemes with land plots totaling 18 hectares under the Kyiv market “Stolychnyi” (Sofiivska Borshchahivka). According to the investigation, these individuals, with the assistance of StateGeoCadastre officials, illegally privatized land that had previously been used by the same agro-combine “Pushcha-Vodytsia,” and then transferred it to “their people.”

Author: Oleksandr Hlazunov