The Supreme Court of Ukraine, by its decision in case 308/4390/18 of 16.12.19, determined the aspects of deviation from the principle of equality of shares in the division of jointly acquired property of spouses.
The fact of the presence of children living with the father (on his full support) and the mother, who does not take part in their life (financial and moral), was considered by the Ukrainian Supreme Court to be a legal basis for the uneven division of property (most of it was awarded to the father).
The Supreme Court of Ukraine decided to divide the joint property in such a way that the father received most of it!
Before the consideration of the case in the Supreme Court of Ukraine, the claim was satisfied by the court of first instance and appeal, and the Supreme Court of Ukraine, considering the complaint of the representative of the defendant, only confirmed the legality and validity of the decisions of the courts of previous instances.
The Ukrainian Supreme Court, “approving” this claim, drew the parties’ attention to the legislative position regarding this situation!
“In accordance with the norm of Part 3 of Art. 70 of the FCU, the court has the right to deviate from the principle of equality of shares of the spouses, provided that there are circumstances such as the residence of children with one of the parents and the amount of alimony received by children from the other parent which is insufficient to ensure the physical or spiritual development ”.
At the same time, the absence of a court decision on the recovery of child support from the “bad” parent, as an argument for an equal division of property, is not a legal factor, since alimony is an obligation that is both voluntary and compulsory at the same time.
The correctness of the application of Part 3 of Art. 70 FCU implies the establishment of the sufficiency or insufficiency of alimony received by the spouse who remained with the children (in the analyzed case, the absence of alimony is obviously a factor of insufficiency).
Consequently, these circumstances have prejudicial significance by virtue of the provisions of Part 4 of Art. 82 CCU when considering this case. The sufficiency of grounds for deviating from the principle of equality in the division of property in this situation is obvious.
The arguments of the unfortunate mother that the above circumstances cannot be arguments for an unequal division, since the plaintiff did not apply to the court to recover alimony from her, did not become key for the correct consideration of the case.
The law was on father’s side, and the family lawyers involved in this process simply helped to apply it in the direction of justice and humanity.
The Ukrainian Supreme Court helped the investor! With the conclusion in case No. 761/5598/15-c of 04.24.2019, he recognized his legal rights in court! History in detail In 2003, an individual investor and a legal entity-developer entered into an agreement on equity participation in the financing of construction. The parties undertook to work together to achieve […]
The Supreme Court of Ukraine, by a resolution on case No. 910/21154 / 17 of 15.02.2019, distinguished between the concepts of “advance payment” and “groundlessly acquired funds”! Legal conclusion promulgated Initially! One legal entity applied to the economic court with a claim against another legal entity to recover the prepayment amount under a contract for […]
Disputed land under the construction is a potential litigation with all the ensuing consequences. The Supreme Court of Ukraine considered one of such disputes and published a legal opinion, which determines that the granting of permission for the development of a land management project regarding the allotment of a “non-free” land plot does not give […]
The Ukrainian Supreme Court spoke about the obligation to pay legal costs in cases of compensation by persons who suffered material damage as a result of injury at work. By the decision in case No. 127/20705 / 16-c of 06/11/2019, the Supreme Court “freed” such persons from paying the court fee! Background of conclusion and […]
Let’s just say that the decision of the Dnieper Court of Appeal in case 199/6247/20 dated 16/06/2021 is not an unprecedented case, but deserves attention, since … In Ukraine now there is no established judicial practice regarding compensation for moral damage caused by illegal actions of law enforcement agencies. There are lonely court decisions, one […]
“All transactions carried out by persons who, at the time of their commission, did not fully realize their actions, are subject to invalidation, but their recognition in court as such should be carried out after a full study of the proceedings!” – This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court of Ukraine on September 18, […]
Entrust the settlement of legal disputes to the SPEAKER team of professionals! Get the highest level of legal services.
Мы готовы приступить к обсуждению Вашей задачи. Вскоре с Вами свяжемся.Back