Problems of legal regulation of the requisition of movable things according to the legislation of Ukraine

In the conditions of the struggle of the Ukrainian State against the armed aggression of the russian federation and the protection of fundamental values on the European continent, the issues of effective regulation of private relations have become important, in particular in connection with the termination of the right of private ownership of physical and legal entities to their property. According to Art. 41 of the Constitution of Ukraine, no one can be unlawfully deprived of the right to property, and the right to private property is inviolable. At the same time, for the purpose of social necessity, ensuring the security of the state, public interests, there may be a need to seize or forcibly alienate property, in particular, movable things belonging to participants in civil relations. In this case, the issues of proper legal regulation of these relations and ensuring an effective mechanism of its action have acquired special importance, which confirms the relevance of these problems. 
The Civil Code of Ukraine has indicated that movable things are things that can be freely moved in space. Also, the legislator has defined the requisition as one of the grounds for terminating property ownership, and in Art. 353 of the Civil Code of Ukraine has detailed that such a basis can be applied in conditions of a state of emergency or war with subsequent full reimbursement of its cost, and in the event of a natural disaster, accident, epizootic epidemic and other extraordinary circumstances for the purpose of public necessity with preliminary and full reimbursement of cost. 
In case of violation of the property owner's rights during the procedure of forced alienation of property, the latter (property owner) has the right to legal protection and the owner of the requisitioned property has the right to appeal the assessment based on which the value of the requisitioned property was reimbursed. In the conditions of martial period, the relevant provisions must be detailed, and the rights of persons whose property is requisitioned must be regulated by law. At the same time, the right of the owner of requisitioned or otherwise compulsorily expropriated property during martial period to appeal the assessment, according to which the value of the requisitioned property was reimbursed, appears to be an effective way of protecting his legitimate interests.