Submit your application

Ukrainian Supreme Court prevented the bank from recovering the shortage from the cash collector

On October 23, 2019, the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 522/6582/16-c published a legal conclusion regarding the wrongness of the bank, which was collecting funds to pay off the loan debt under a non-existent loan agreement.

Details of the proceedings

A citizen-former employee of the bank went to court with a claim against the bank to recover the funds received without reason by the latter. The motivated statement of claim was as follows:

  • the plaintiff worked in the bank as a driver-security guard-collector;
  • there was a shortage of funds in one of the branches;
  • the bank “hung up” this shortage on the plaintiff and began to write off from his salary account;
  • the write-off was carried out on base as “repayment of debt under a loan agreement”;
  • since the plaintiff did not enter into a loan agreement with the bank, he considers that the write-off was unreasonable;
  • therefore, the money must be returned, since it is his salary.

The plaintiff stated in court that he was not guilty of the loss of the safe package, therefore the money from him, as compensation for damage, was illegally debited!

The court of first instance dismissed the claim, pointing out to the plaintiff the existence of an employment relationship between him and the bank, in particular, enshrined in an agreement on full liability, which “allowed” the bank to enforce the recovery from the employee. The appeal court agreed with this!

“The cassation instance“ represented by the Supreme Court decided the issue in a different way! The circumstances of the incident were investigated in more detail and the fact of the absence of a loan agreement was objectively assessed as a basis for writing off funds from the plaintiff.”

The following was found out:

  1. The transportation of money, in which the plaintiff participated, was carried out collectively, which makes it impossible to establish the individual responsibility of each of the driver-collectors.
  2. Clause one logically assumes that the controversial funds could be recovered on the basis of an agreement on collective (brigade) material liability.
  3. The specified agreement is absent in the case materials, therefore, the decisions of the courts of the previous instances to recover the bank’s losses are based on the lack of proof of the plaintiff’s guilt.
  4. The official investigation in the bank ended with the fact that “the shortage was probably the fault of the drivers,” and the final decision had to be made after the conclusions of the polygraph.
  5. The plaintiff was dismissed from his post due to a loss of confidence, but before this happened, money was written off from his salary to pay off non-existent credit debt.

These circumstances “speak” that the funds were written off illegally, since there is no loan agreement, therefore, the loan was not provided and the plaintiff’s obligation to pay for it simply does not exist in nature!



The granddaughter whiсh is registered in the grandmother’s house, for donation is not an obstacle!

The grandmother in court proved her right to donate housing, despite the fact that her little granddaughter was registered in it! The Supreme court, by its conclusion in case No. 385/1598/18, determined that she is not a parent and not the one who replaces him, therefore, she is free in the right of alienation! Here […]

A raider in a court gown and with a “crust” of a lawyer, nonsense? Not at all!

Judges, lawyers and justice officials love money too! Sometimes they use their connections and powers to improve their financial well-being! Some find themselves a lucrative “hobby”, for example, they are engaged in raiding. SBU officers uncovered a criminal scheme carried out by “raiders in court robes” with the help of lawyers and former employees of […]

To Guarantors! Artificial insolvency is impossible!

A case won in court does not mean that the lender will automatically receive what the borrower owes him! One of the “worked out” schemes among the bank’s borrowers is that they alienate property at the stage of judicial review or during the period when the court decision comes into force. The main thing in […]

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 […]

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 […]

The nuances of transactions made by persons who are not aware of their actions

“All transactions carried out by persons who, at the time of their commission, did not fully realize their actions, are subject to invalidation, but their recognition in court as such should be carried out after a full study of the proceedings!” – This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court of Ukraine on September 18, […]