Judgment of the Supreme Court on the cassation complaint filed by the father against the judgment of the lower courts, which dismissed the claim to determine the children’s place of residence with the father in Ukraine (case № 127/12587/22)

This civil case concerns a dispute between parents over the determination of the residence of their two children. The father filed a lawsuit requesting that the children reside with him in Ukraine after they relocated with their mother to Switzerland due to martial law. The mother and children have been living in Switzerland since February 2022.

The father argued that the children, living abroad, were deprived of the opportunity to communicate in their native language, maintain their national identity, and receive a comprehensive education. He believed that their interests would be better protected if they returned to Ukraine and lived with him.

The courts of first and appellate instances dismissed the father’s claim. It was established that both the father and the mother were capable of providing adequate living and developmental conditions for the children. However, the children had already adapted to life in Switzerland, where they had suitable housing, access to education, and medical care. During the court proceedings, the older child expressed a desire to remain with the mother.

The courts also considered that Switzerland provides a safe environment for the children, especially given the martial law situation in Ukraine. All submitted evidence, including the guardianship authority’s conclusion, confirmed that residing with their mother in Switzerland aligns with the children’s best interests.

The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the father’s cassation appeal, concluded that the decisions of the lower courts were lawful and justified. The court considered the children’s preferences, the conditions established for their development, their adaptation to new circumstances, and safety concerns. It was determined that the children’s best interests are safeguarded in Switzerland.

The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts, dismissing the father’s claim. The Supreme Court also took into account the imposition of martial law in Ukraine and the safety considerations for the children. Evaluating the case comprehensively, the Supreme Court agreed with the conclusions of the lower courts to deny the claim for determining the children’s residence with the father in Ukraine.