Call Leave a request
Ban on travel abroad: aspects of imposition and removal!

Ban on travel abroad: aspects of imposition and removal!

CPCU prohibits debtors from leaving the country! This means that when trying to go abroad, an individual may suddenly find out that it is he who is prohibited from doing this, since this restrictive measure has been applied to him, established as an enforcement of the court decision.

“Surprise”! Debt payment does not automatically open the border. The reason is that the process of lifting the ban is regulated by law, but not directly, let’s say.

First of all, such a person will need urgent legal advice on the topic of “debts”!

We analyze the legislative context of the issue!

CPCU (Art. 337) establishes the rules for the temporary restriction of the right to travel outside our country, as an exceptional measure to ensure the execution of the will of justice.

The norm consists of 5 parts, each of which determines the procedure for the application of this measure by the court.

In particular, part 4 of this article provides the court with the opportunity to immediately consider the application of the ban without notifying the parties at the request of the executive service bodies.

The law allows the judicial authorities to temporarily restrict the right to leave the country for ordinary citizens and debtors involved in insolvency cases in the manner regulated by the Bankruptcy Procedure Code.

“A gap in the legislation is the regulation of the issue of cancellation of this exceptional security measure. There are norms in the national legislation that would determine the procedure and grounds for canceling the ban on leaving Ukraine, but … The procedure is lengthy and quick to resolve this issue “on the spot” in nature so far does not exist! “

CPCU (Art. 441) states that a court can annul a temporary ban on leaving by issuing a ruling (decision) based on a reasoned statement from an interested party in enforcement proceedings.

At the same time, the law grants the court the right to consider such an application within 10 days from the date of filing. The decision to annul the ban or refuse to cancel it is subject to appeal.

After refusal, the debtor has the right to again apply to the court with a similar request if there are circumstances justifying his request.

Is there a quick way to solve the problem?

There is no quick way to lift the ban “at the border”! To vacation or on a business trip outside Ukraine, debts may not be “allowed” and it will not be possible to resolve this issue immediately by repaying them in the event of a problem.

A short algorithm for the actions of a debtor faced with such a problem:

  1. “Locally” find out who the initiator of the ban (executive service or court), the reason and date of its installation.
  2. Obtain a copy of the decision-basis for establishing the ban from the initiator.
  3. Depending on the answer received: appeal the ban, ask for its cancellation, fulfill the obligation.

Importantly! Any trip can be “insured” if you contact the State Border Service in advance with a request and clarify the presence / absence of a ban on crossing the border!

14.02.2020

497

YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN
When is it impossible to evict from mortgage housing “to nowhere”?

The most useful legal opinion of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 761/22755/18 of 06.11.2019 – legal assistance (consultation), a life story about how the bank failed to evict a defaulting borrower from a mortgage apartment “to nowhere”! Background of the proceedings The bank applied to the court with a claim for eviction […]

The Supreme Court of Ukraine on the cancellation of the “old” will with a new one

The citizen applied to the court with a claim against two other persons, demanding the recognition of property rights by inheritance. The claim was motivated by the fact that after the death of her aunt, an inheritance for real estate (house, land) was opened. She, within the time period established by law, turned to the […]

One aspect of resolving disputes over land use rights

Disputed land under the construction is a potential litigation with all the ensuing consequences. The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered one of such disputes and published a legal opinion, which determines that the granting of permission for the development of a land management project regarding the allotment of a “non-free” land plot does not give […]

Ukrainian Supreme Court: Responsibility of a bona fide purchaser

Due to the “carelessness” of the notary, the person almost lost the housing they bought for their own money! The APU “saved” him. Case No. 645/4220/16-ts of 13.11.2019 The citizen applied to the court with a claim against two persons and a third party – a notary, demanding the invalidation of the sale and purchase […]

Supreme Court of Ukraine on the interpretation of treaties on the basis of contra proferentem

The Ukrainian Supreme Court “remembered” about the “contra proferentem” principle! By the decision in case No. 756/1381/17-c of 03/25/2020, he consolidated the legal conclusion based on this doctrine. It reads: “If the interpretation of the content of a written agreement by means of general methods is impossible, the contra proferentem interpretation is used – the […]

Civil marriage: showdown because of the apartment bought in it

Family showdown is an eternal topic! Even the array of family legislation and court practice accumulated over decades does not contain answers to all questions regarding family relations! The Supreme Court once again had to figure out whether or not the testimonies of witnesses certified by a notary are considered legal confirmation of a civil […]

Address

01133, Kyiv, blvd. Lesi Ukrainky 26 (block L26), office 613

Email

info@grandliga.com.ua

Phone number

+380443395088

We work

Schedule: from 10:00 to 18:00
Weekend: Sunday

Make a route