4.  The applicant company, Bazalt Impeks limited liability company, is a Ukrainian legal entity registered in Svitlovodsk. 5.  In June 2006 an IT company lodged a claim with the Kirovograd Regional Commercial Court against the applicant company seeking the cancellation of a contract and return of property. 6.  By a decision of 26 July 2006, the court found against the applicant company. On 2 October 2006 the Dnipropetrovs’k Regional Commercial Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant company’s appeal and upheld the decision of the first-instance court. 7.  By a decision of 12 December 2006, the Higher Commercial Court, upon the applicant company’s appeal, quashed the decisions of the lower courts and found in favour of the applicant company. 8.  On 20 February 2007 the Supreme Court of Ukraine, upon the IT company’s cassation appeal, quashed the ruling of the Higher Commercial Court on the ground that its findings had been unfounded and erroneous, and upheld the decision of the Dnipropetrovs’k Regional Commercial Court of Appeal. In taking this decision, the Supreme Court noted:
“The Supreme Court of Ukraine, with regard to the provisions of Articles 6 and 8 of the Constitution of Ukraine, does not consider it necessary to remit the case for fresh examination to the first-instance court. This would be contrary to the provisions of Article 125 of the Constitution of Ukraine and sections 2 and 39 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Judicial System of Ukraine” [the Judiciary Act] regarding the status of the Supreme Court of Ukraine and its task to ensure the administration of justice in accordance with the law. It would further cause a constitutionally unacceptable need to quash the lawful decision of the court of appeal. In this regard, the list of possible outcomes of cassation appeals against decisions of the Higher Commercial Court of Ukraine envisaged in Article 111-18 of the Code of Commercial Procedure of Ukraine is not considered a legal impediment to adopting the decision.” 9.  On 5 March 2007 the decision of the Supreme Court was sent to the applicant company.