Judgment of the Supreme Court on the cassation complaint filed by the father against the judgments of the lower courts (case № 760/31518/21)

This judgment concerns the determination of a child’s place of residence. The mother filed a claim to establish the residence of her minor son with her. The father contested this decision, requesting additional measures such as appointing a psychological examination and contacting a foreign court to assess the child’s living conditions.

The judgments of the courts of first instance and appeal granted the mother’s claim, determining that the child should reside with her. It was noted that the child has an emotional bond with the mother, lives in a stable environment with her, and that this arrangement aligns with the child’s best interests. The courts also concluded that the father failed to provide evidence supporting the advantages of the child living with him.

During the review of the father’s cassation appeal, the Supreme Court found that the judgments of the lower courts were made in compliance with substantive and procedural law. The Court considered the child’s safety due to martial law in Ukraine and his temporary stay in France, where a suitable environment for his life and development is ensured. The father’s arguments for an additional psychological examination and contact with a foreign court were deemed unfounded.

The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts’ judgments, concluding that the child’s best interests are served by living with the mother. The judgment is final and not subject to further appeal.