The article focuses on the mechanism of compensation to the victim for the damage caused by a criminal offense and the positive obligations of the state to guarantee to everyone under its jurisdiction the effective use of property rights and its restoration in case of violation. Attention is drawn to the long-term absence in the national legislation of Ukraine of a mechanism of compensation at the expense of the State Budget of Ukraine for damage caused to the victim as a result of a criminal offense. The article analyzes the impact of the conclusions made by the European Court of Human Rights on the jurisprudence of domestic courts of Ukraine with regard to the inadmissibility of the applicant's complaint set out in the Court's judgment in «Petliovannny vs. Ukraine». On the other hand, there have been included examples of application of the rule of law and recognition by courts of violations of the guarantees, enshrined in Part 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention, due to the long-term lack in the national legislation of the procedure of compensation provided from the State Budget of Ukraine for unlawful destruction of property. The article analyzes and compares the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and national courts regarding the interpretation of similar legal relations guaranteed by Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of every natural or legal person’s right to peaceful enjoyment of their possessions. Attention is drawn to the need to create and apply a mechanism to provide the victim with compensation for the damage caused by a criminal offense. It is proposed to continue research in this area in comparison with other areas of application of Article 1 of the First Protocol in order to facilitate amendments to national legislation aimed at unconditional observance of human rights provided by Article 41 of the Constitution of Ukraine on inviolability of property rights.