Contact center of the Ukrainian Judiciary 044 207-35-46
If a child’s registration in mortgaged residential property obstructs its sale, the enforcement officer may apply to the court under Article 435 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine. However, the creditor also has the right to file a claim for recognition that the child has lost the right to use the residential property. This method of protection is proper and effective, as it enables the court to stop the debtor’s bad-faith attempts to evade performance of the credit obligation and the court decision.
These conclusions were reached by the Supreme Court sitting as the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court in order to ensure the uniformity of case law.
Pursuant to Article 15 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, every person has the right to protection of their civil rights in the event of their violation, non-recognition, or contestation.
In the case under review, the creditor filed a lawsuit seeking recognition that the debtor’s minor granddaughter had lost the right to use the apartment, citing that, as a result of the debtor’s bad-faith actions, the creditor’s right to realise the mortgaged property in the course of compulsory enforcement of the court decision on recovery of the credit debt was being violated.
The courts of previous instances granted the claim, noting that the debtor had violated the requirements of the Law of Ukraine “On Enforcement Proceedings” by registering the minor child’s place of residence in the disputed apartment during the enforcement proceedings for recovery of the credit debt. Such actions cannot be evidence of the child acquiring housing rights to the property. The courts emphasised that the defendant’s actions demonstrated bad-faith behaviour.
The Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court concluded that, in order to eliminate circumstances that make it impossible to enforce the decision on recovery of credit debt at the expense of the mortgaged property (in particular, due to the registration of a child in it without the creditor’s consent), the enforcement officer has the right to apply to the court with an application (submission) for foreclosure on such property under Article 435 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine.
At the same time, the creditor also has the right to independently file a claim for recognition that the child has lost the right to use the residential property, since this method of protection is proper and effective. It allows the court to directly assess the good faith of the debtor’s actions, ensure a balance of the parties’ rights, and take into account the best interests of the child in situations where the registration of the child’s place of residence at the stage of property realisation is aimed at deliberately complicating the enforcement of the court decision.
The assessment of the bad faith of the debtor’s (mortgagor’s) actions, consisting in registering a child’s place of residence in the mortgaged residential property at the stage of its realisation during compulsory enforcement of a court decision, may also be the subject of judicial review when considering the relevant submission of the enforcement officer regarding foreclosure on the debtor’s immovable property in which children are registered.
In view of the above, the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court agreed with the conclusions of the lower courts regarding the need to protect the creditor’s rights and to grant the claim in order to restore the parties to their previous legal position, which would allow completion of the procedure for the compulsory realisation of the debtor’s immovable property.
Resolution of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court dated 2 February 2026 in case No. 522/3747/22 (proceedings No. 61-16480ñâî24) – https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/133947141.
This and other legal positions of the Supreme Court can be found in the Database of Legal Positions of the Supreme Court - https://lpd.court.gov.ua.
_03_03.png)