Publication date: 14.07.2025
I specialize in resolving complex legal issues in the fields of energy, commercial, and administrative law. I combine deep legal expertise with hands-on experience in litigation, contract work, and business support.
Initial Information:
A client approached me as a professional attorney from Odesa — a power supply company that faced a critical situation: following a Resolution adopted by the NEURC, the company was unlawfully assigned electricity consumption volumes in the amount of 4 million kilowatt-hours. The issue was that these volumes were assigned for a period when the contract with the consumer was no longer valid.
The termination of the contract between the supplier and the consumer took place pursuant to Clause 3.2.15, Chapter 3.2, Section III of the Commercial Electricity Supply Rules (CESR), based on mutual agreement. In accordance with this provision, the electricity supplier is obligated to notify the consumer, system operators, and the "last resort" supplier 20 calendar days before contract termination, which was duly fulfilled.
Problem:
Despite the lawful termination of the contract, the NEURC adopted a Resolution requiring my client to assume responsibility for 4 million kWh consumed by another party. This created financial and legal risks amounting to hundreds of thousands of UAH, violated good faith principles, and breached legal provisions set out in the CESR.
The client had a clear goal: to have the NEURC Resolution revoked and to defend their interests in court.
Solution:
After analyzing the circumstances, case materials, and applicable regulations, a decision was made to challenge the NEURC Resolution through administrative proceedings.
- A comprehensive administrative lawsuit was prepared, involving third parties — key players in the electricity market, including:
- SE NPC "Ukrinterenergo";
- JSC "Mykolaivoblenergo".
- A clear legal position was developed, based on procedural violations related to the contract termination and abuse of regulatory authority in reallocating consumption volumes without justification.
- The lawsuit was filed with the administrative court, initiating a lengthy trial process covering three instances:
- The first-instance court fully satisfied the administrative claim;
- Two appeal complaints were submitted but were dismissed by the appellate court;
- Finally, the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine also rejected the cassation appeals.
Outcome:
My client — the electricity supplier — succeeded in having the NEURC Resolution fully revoked, and the 4 million kWh of unlawfully assigned consumption was removed.
- The parties' legal relations were restored to their original lawful state.
- All court rulings across the three instances confirmed the client's legal position and the inadmissibility of imposing responsibility for energy not actually supplied.
Result:
- The NEURC Resolution was revoked by court.
No financial losses for the client. - A precedent that can be used in similar cases to protect the interests of other suppliers.
- The client maintained their reputation as a good-faith participant in the electricity market and avoided unjustified obligations.
The case included over 14 volumes of documentation, was complex, and rich in nuances of energy and procedural law, yet was successfully concluded due to a comprehensive approach and my professional legal support.
This case demonstrates how a professional attorney from Odesa can effectively defend business interests even in disputes with a state regulator. Through in-depth analysis, strategic planning, and persistent legal advocacy, it was possible not only to overturn the unlawful Resolution, but also to establish an important legal precedent in the field of energy law.
