Will e-commerce and convenience stores displace large supermarkets?

[roseline371274]

We earn our money when we sell the business. Interview with the co-owner of the Dairy Alliance
Format competition.
Billion-dollar losses, transit restoration and port digitalization. Interview with the head of the USPA
In the resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of June 30, 2020 in case No. 727/2878/19 (proceedings No. 14-516цс19), it was concluded that if the seizure of property was imposed in accordance with the procedure provided for by the 2012 CPC of Ukraine, a person who believes that such actions have violated his right to property, even if he is not a participant in the criminal proceedings, and the latter was closed by the investigator with his resolution, has the right to apply to the investigating judge with a motion special database o cancel the seizure in the criminal proceedings. Such a procedure for protecting the right to property is effective, since it will ensure the restoration of the right of the owner or other possessor of the property on which the seizure was imposed by the investigating judge in criminal proceedings.

Part 3 of Article 169 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine provides that the investigator and prosecutor, upon receiving a court decision on the full or partial cancellation of the seizure of temporarily seized property, must immediately take measures to implement the court decision and send a notification of its implementation to the investigating judge.

The procedure for applying to court for judicial protection in criminal proceedings is regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. In particular, the filing of an appeal against the decision of the investigating judge, issued as a result of the consideration of a complaint, application or motion of a participant in criminal proceedings, must be carried out in compliance with certain conditions.