Provision of software development services: analysing court practice

Case No. 910/14467/19 – computer-technical examination of finished software for compliance with the terms of the contract

E-Consulting filed a lawsuit against Information Court Systems to recover debt under a contract for the completion of the ESITS contact centre subsystem. The plaintiff claimed that it had performed the work and delivered it to the customer, as confirmed by the work completion certificates, technical and operational documentation, and the subsystem passport.

During the proceedings, a computer-technical examination was appointed, which confirmed the partial implementation of the software functions, the complexity of using the code, and the shortcomings of the technical documentation.

The court recognised the actual performance of the work, but also the delay in payment, emphasising that late receipt of the certificate did not exempt the defendant from the obligation to pay for the work actually performed.

As a result, the defendant was ordered to pay UAH 5,105,541.00 in debt, UAH 40,284.82 in 3% annual interest, and UAH 77,187.39 in court fees.

In addition, the counterclaim was partially satisfied: a penalty of UAH 83,277.32 was recovered for violation of the terms of service provision and court fees of UAH 1,249.16.

The defendant’s cassation appeal was dismissed (Decision No. 910/14467/19 of 22 August 2024, Supreme Court, Cassation Commercial Court).

Case No. 922/4501/24 – payment by the customer as confirmation of signing the acts and acceptance of work

Artem Mykolayovych Lytvyn, an individual entrepreneur, filed a lawsuit against Oleg Mykolayovych Grygoriev, an individual entrepreneur, to recover UAH 1,771,900 paid under a contract for software development. The claimant said that the respondent didn’t do any of the work, so the customer sent the contractor a letter saying they were cancelling the contract and wanted their money back.

The defendant provided evidence of the work performed: reports on the work performed, sent from his Telegram account, confirmation of their receipt by the plaintiff, as well as payment instructions with the designation ‘prepayment for the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th stages of software development.’

In the court’s opinion, each subsequent payment by the Claimant confirmed the signing of the relevant certificate and the proper performance of the next stage of work, since no claims regarding the quality or timing of the work had been made.

The plaintiff objected to the proper execution and signing of the acts, since his electronic signature was missing from the documents. However, the court rejected the arguments, noting that correspondence by e-mail had become part of business practice in Ukraine.

Thus, the court found that the acts had been signed and sent from official email addresses and therefore dismissed the claims (Decision No. 922/4501/24 of 30 June 2025, Eastern Commercial Court of Appeal).

Case No. 904/2157/24 – phased payment for software development services does not confirm full completion of work

BO ‘BF TIM4YU’ filed a lawsuit against an individual entrepreneur to recover UAH 302,817.64 – the principal debt, UAH 47,543.52 – penalties, UAH 5,192.71 – 3% per annum, UAH 7,956.69 – inflation index, citing the Defendant’s improper performance of the Software Development Agreement.

Previously, BO ‘BF TIM4YU’ sent the Defendant a request refusing to accept the work, sign the received acts and pay the invoices, since the deadlines for the performance of the work had been violated and the results had not been transferred.

The Defendant claims that the Plaintiff accepted the intermediate versions of the software as partial payment. Thus, the sole proprietor’s account statement shows payments to the Fund in the amount of UAH 302,818.40, each with the designation: ‘advance payment for IT services under the agreement’ or ‘payment for services according to the act.’

The court rejected the sole proprietor’s arguments, noting that the contract provided for advance payment, so BO ‘BF TIM4YU’ made advance payments to receive future services. In addition, the defendant did not provide evidence of timely notification of readiness, phased transfer of work results and interim acts.

The Commercial Court recovered the debt under the Agreement from the Respondent, and the Court of Appeal upheld the decision. (Decision of 13 May 2025 No. 904/2157/24 Central Commercial Court of Appeal).

Case 914/2195/23 – screenshots do not prove the fact of software transfer

An individual entrepreneur filed a lawsuit against BO ‘TIM4UA’ to recover UAH 87,734.25 under a software development agreement, claiming that the work had been completed and transferred via the GitHub cloud repository and the online version of map.wearehit.org. The following evidence was submitted: acts of work performed, notification of completion of work, and screenshots from web pages.

In a letter of demand, BO ‘TIM4UA’ refused to accept the software from the Claimant due to the lack of access to the repository.

The court upheld the Defendant’s arguments, emphasising that the certificates of completion are interim and therefore do not confirm the completion and transfer of the programme in full.

The claim was dismissed. The Court of Appeal agreed with the conclusions of the court of first instance and additionally emphasised that the printouts submitted by the parties in the form of screenshots did not establish the fact of the transfer of the software.

(Decision of 10 May 2024 No. 914/2195/23 Western Commercial Court of Appeal)

Conclusion

Therefore, a software development agreement is a guarantee of protection of the interests of both the customer and the contractor. To avoid disputes under the agreement, it is important to consider the following when concluding it:

the procedure for acceptance and transfer of completed work – signing of acceptance and transfer certificates (if possible, add a testing period for the finished software product);
clear terms of payment, deadlines and stages of software development;
documentation requirements – duly executed and signed (including electronic) acts allow you to record both interim and final results, which provides evidence to confirm the acceptance of services.