найкращі інтереси дитини

The applicant lived in social housing provided by the local authorities because she was disabled and had four children with her husband. Gradually, the relationship between the applicant and her husband began to deteriorate as he abused alcohol and threatened her and the children. He sometimes subjected her to physical and psychological violence. Over several years, the applicant repeatedly appealed to the police with complaints about her husband’s abuse and ill-treatment of her. In response, law enforcement agencies only visited the residence and conducted preventive talks.

The first applicant and her husband divorced in 2017. Their children lived with the first applicant. The applicant claimed that her ex-husband had tried to force her to resume their relationship and behaved aggressively towards her and their sons. Then he took away their son (the second applicant) without the first applicant’s consent, refused to return him for about four months, and tried to kidnap their second son. The first applicant immediately contacted the police.

The applicant and his wife were in a registered marriage and had a child. Over time, their relationship began to deteriorate. The applicant’s wife took the child and left without the applicant's consent. A few months later, the applicant independently found the child in another location where his wife lived with the child and her uncle. Later, the applicant’s mother contacted the police because she believed that the child could have been a victim of debauchery during the period of living with the applicant’s wife and her uncle, based on information from the child.

            Spouses who have children may file to a competent court a divorce application supported by a written agreement detailing with whom the children will live following the divorce, to what extent the other parent will support the children, and the other parent's right to care for the children. The competent court shall award a divorce one month following the submission of the divorce application, if it is established that the divorce application is in line with the genuine intent of the wife and husband.

Articles 49, 50 of the Family Code of Ukraine refer the right to maternity and the right to parentage to the personal non-property rights of spouses. The term “maternity” means women’s legally guaranteed right to reproductive opportunity on (i.e., to give birth to children, raise them). The core of this personal non-property right is the wife's authority to decide whether or not to have a child. In addition, these articles establish that a woman's reluctance to have a child or her inability to conceive a child can be grounds for the dissolution of marriage.

The appellant went to court to deprive the defendant, her husband, of parental rights of their children. According to her, the defendant was not paying sufficient attention to the upbringing, health, and development of their child as well as failed to pay child support. Furthermore, there were conflicts between the spouses that had a negative impact on the child.

The mother of minors (the plaintiff) had been convicted for committing a criminal offense. After serving her sentence, the plaintiff asked the child services agency to return her children to her; their grandmother had been appointed as their guardian as a way of protecting the rights and interests of the children. According to the plaintiff, after her release she got a job and a room in a dormitory, and she wanted to be allowed to raise her children on her own.

The plaintiff asked the court for a restraining order to protect herself and a child she had with her ex-husband (the defendant). According to her, the defendant would often resort to insulting her, using physical force on her in the presence of a small child (allegation supported by a forensic expert’s report), using obscene language regarding her, and systematically engaging in psychological violence that involved intimidation and stalking of her and their child.

The spouses were officially divorced. The appellant (the father) sued the defendant, his ex-wife, to remove obstacles to communication with his child and his participation in the child’s upbringing, as well as to determine the method of his involvement in the child’s upbringing. According to the appellant, after their divorce the defendant started trying to prevent him from fulfilling his parental duties and to turn the child against the appellant.