✅ The right to property that has increased significantly during the marriage

The right to property that has increased significantly during the marriage

The right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage in Ukraine

Our family lawyers are often asked the following questions: What property is not divided upon divorce? What costs are considered to affect the reallocation of property rights?

On our website advokat-skriabin.com you can familiarize yourself with the topic: “The right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage” and, if you have any questions, seek legal advice from our family lawyers and lawyers who will provide you with legal services in family matters.

The emergence of the right to the property of the spouses in Ukraine

Article 62. The emergence of the right of common joint ownership of spouses to property that belonged to the wife, husband:

  1. If the property of the wife or husband during the marriage has significantly increased in its value due to the general labor or monetary costs or expenses of the second of the spouses, in the event of a dispute, it can be recognized by a court decision as the object of the joint property rights of the spouses.
  2. If one of the spouses, by their labor and (or) funds, took part in the maintenance of the property belonging to the second of the spouses, in the management of this property or in the care of it, then the income (offspring, dividends) received from this property, in the event of a dispute by a court decision can be recognized as an object of the law of common joint property of spouses.

The right of common joint property of spouses in Ukraine

Noting the existence in marriage and family legislation of guarantees of the inadmissibility of the unconditional automatic transformation of the legal regime of separate property into common property, the legislator nevertheless allows the possibility of recognizing the separate property of one of the spouses as their joint property.

In accordance with Art. 25 KBS of Ukraine if the property that was the property of one of the spouses during the marriage has significantly increased in value due to labor or monetary costs of the other spouse or both of them, it can be recognized as common joint property of the spouses.

An analysis of the above norm gives reason to believe that such legal consequences can occur only in the event of a significant increase in separate property in its value due to labor or monetary costs of the spouse who owns it.

That is, the mere fact that a husband has carried out current or even major repairs to his wife’s premarital house cannot yet be a sufficient reason for recognizing this house as common property, because all adult family members must take care of maintaining a residential building in which they live as family members , in good condition.

This position was formulated by judicial practice long before the adoption in 1968 of the foundations of marriage and family legislation.

Therefore, it is quite logical that the developers of the new family legislation retained the existing legal regulation of such relations, slightly improving it. At the same time, the wording of Part 1 of Article 62 is not devoid of vulnerable provisions.

The concept of materiality will be interpreted differently, an increase in its value of separate property, because such a period does not contain sufficient evaluation criteria for an objective determination of the value of the processed object.

In addition, neither the CoBS of Ukraine nor the Investigative Committee say anything about the amount of labor or monetary costs of one of the spouses to increase the value of the separate property of the other spouse.

Meanwhile, the size of investments in the transformation of separate property does not always lead to an adequate increase in its final value.

That is, insignificant cash or labor investments can lead to a significant increase in the value of separate property and vice versa.

However, it would hardly be fair to recognize the separate object of one of the spouses as joint property for insignificant financial or labor investments of the other spouse.

Unfortunately, the judicial practice has not yet formulated sufficient recommendations for the effective consideration of such disputes between spouses.

Thus, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in its decision of October 4, 1991 “On the practice of the courts’ application of legislation regulating the ownership of citizens to a residential house” (paragraph 5) only drew the attention of the courts to the fact that a house that belonged to one of the spouses could be recognized in accordance with Art. 25 MOSC with the common property of spouses, if during the period of marriage its value has significantly increased due to labor or monetary costs of the other spouse or both of them.

Actually, the Plenum was limited to actually repeating the legislative provision.

Therefore, it is not surprising that when considering specific cases, the courts lack guidelines for the correct resolution of disputes between spouses.

Consideration of a case on division of property of spouses in Ukraine

So, in April 1988 Sh.A. filed a claim against Sh.T. for the division of the spouses’ property, in which she asked to allocate 1/2 part of the house in kind and recover compensation for 1/2 part of the car acquired during the period of being married to 1961 to 1968

By the decision of the Bershad District Court, the claim was partially satisfied and monetary compensation for the part of the house belonging to him was recovered in favor of the plaintiff.

The case was not considered on appeal.

A protest was filed by the Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of Ukraine.

The Presidium of the Vinnytsia Regional Court upheld the protest and in its decision, in particular, noted that it was impossible to agree with the decision of the court, since it was adopted on insufficiently verified circumstances of the case.

As follows from the materials of the case, according to the donation agreement, the house cost at that time (in 1959) 1070 rubles. was presented to the defendant.

The cost of the house at the time of the consideration of the case was 5,049,625 rubles. In connection with its improvement by the spouses.

Based on the foregoing, the court on the basis of Art. 25 The CoBS of Ukraine recognized the house as the common property of the spouses, but when determining their shares in the common property did not take into account that the share of the spouse to whom it belongs should have been increased by the amount of the value of the house for its improvement (Practice of the courts of Ukraine in civil cases: 995. No. З.С. 107-108).

Thus, from the decision of the Presidium of the Vinnytsia Regional Court (in contrast to the decision of the Bershad District Court), there is an attempt in the courts to identify the quantitative volume of the increase in the value of the building after improvements in monetary terms.

True, this was not done in order to establish the amount of increase in the value of separate property as a sufficient basis for recognizing it as common property, but only to increase the share of the spouse who owned the house by the amount of its value for improvements.

At the same time, in the Bershad District Court, in our opinion, there were sufficient grounds for recognizing a residential building as the common property of the spouses, because its value increased significantly as a result of such investments.

However, in this case, the question of the amount of investments of one of the spouses in the separate property of the second of them was not investigated at all; it could serve as a sufficient basis for extending the regime of community to him.

Accounting for labor and monetary investments of spouses in common property in Ukraine

When considering such cases, one should take into account not only the new increased value of the separate property of one of the spouses, but also the size of labor and monetary investments of the second of them, who is not its owner, as well as the cost of the separate property for its improvement.

In any case, these investments must also be significant, for example, at least 50 percent of the improved property.

It seems that for a smaller investment in improving the separate property there will not be sufficient legal grounds for declaring it the joint property of the spouses.

In this case, the spouse has only the right to demand from the owner monetary compensation for his investments.

At the same time, it should be noted that modern judicial practice on the application of Part 1 of Article 62 has not yet formulated generalized legal positions with some exceptions.

So, in the ruling of the Chamber of Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of Ukraine in case No. 6-1447ts17 of 08.11.2017, it is noted: “To apply the rules provided for in Article 62 of the SK, an increase in the value of property must occur as a result of joint costs of spouses, regardless of other factors (in particular, trends in the general rise in price of a particular property), while a significant increase in the value of property as an object, its quality characteristics should be an essential feature.

The increase in the value of the property and the materiality of such an increase is subject to clarification by comparing the time of resolving the dispute over the value of the object before and after the improvement; at the same time, the size of the monetary costs of the spouses or one of them, as well as being determined at the time of the consideration of the case, the cost of repair work cannot be considered the only factor, undoubtedly testifies to the significance of the increase in the value of the property as an object. ”

Thus, here it is proposed to take into account both the value of the property itself, which is subject to improvement, and the value of the invested monetary or other costs, which should indicate the materiality of the improvements.

Unlike part 1 of the commented article, which establishes the grounds for recognizing the separate property of one of the spouses as common property, part 2 of this article establishes the basis for recognizing the common joint property of income (offspring, dividends) received from the separate property of one of the spouses.

This is possible if the court establishes that the second of them took part in the maintenance of such property, in the management or care of it.

Family lawyer in cases of the right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage in Ukraine

To effectively resolve the case of the right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage, you should contact professional family lawyers.

Property lawyer:

  • provide legal advice on family matters;
  • will help to determine the best option for solving a family case;
  • prepare all the necessary documents;
  • accompanies the course of the entire trial.

Our family lawyers will do everything necessary for a quick and high-quality completion of a legal case!

Contacting us is a way to save time and money in resolving the issue of the right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage.

If you do not know how to do the right thing to decide the case in your favor – write or call our family lawyers!

The first step on the road to success in solving a case on the right to property, which has increased significantly during the marriage, is to contact good family lawyers!

If the article “The right to property that has significantly increased during the marriage” was useful for you – like it. We will provide you with the most relevant and useful information in the field of family law, as well as about new changes in the legislation of Ukraine on the right to property, which has significantly increased during the marriage.

Frequently asked questions to a lawyer in Ukraine

How can property that belonged to one of the spouses be transferred to common joint ownership?
Can income from the property of one of the spouses be considered common property?

Useful site materials advokat-skriabin.com:

  1. Division of property of spouses
  2. Amount of shares in the property of the spouses
  3. Imposition of foreclosure on the property of spouses
  4. Division of property in a civil marriage
  5. Personal private property of spouses
  6. Common joint property of spouses
  7. Objects of the right of common joint ownership
  8. Exercise by spouses of the right of common joint property
  9. Disposal of property of spouses
  10. The right to use the property of the spouses
advokat-skriabin.com

google

division of property of common joint property

division of property of former spouses

common joint property upon divorce

common property of spouses

car sharing by spouses

spouses’ ownership

spouses’ common property right

property acquired in marriage

joint property of spouses in Ukraine

real estate acquired in marriage

common property of spouses

what property is not divided upon divorce

YANDEX

title to property

real estate rights

ownership of property

registration of rights to property

registration of rights to real estate

right to state property

from state rights to real estate

state registration of property rights

state registration of rights to real estate

ADVEGO

property 48 3.29
spouse 37 2.54
general 19 1.30
it is 18 1.24
cost 18 1.24
right 16 1.10
separate 15 1.03
family 15 1.03
significant 15 1.03
cash 14 0.96
separate property 14 0.96 / 1.92
property 14 0.96
marriage 12 0.82
significantly increased 12 0.82 / 1.65
increase 12 0.82
one 11 0.75
one spouse 11 0.75 / 1.51
Rejects increased significantly 11 0.75 / 2.26
attachment 10 0.69
cost 10 0.69
joint 10 0.69
article 10 0.69
lawyer 9 0.62
property substantially 9 0.62 / 1.24
base 9 0.62
property law 9 0.62 / 1.24
solution 9 0.62

Rate article
( No ratings yet )
Share to friends
SKRIABIN
How can property that belonged to one of the spouses be transferred to common joint ownership?
In accordance with Art. 25 KBS of Ukraine if the property that was the property of one of the spouses during the marriage has significantly increased in value due to labor or monetary costs of the other spouse or both of them, it can be recognized as common joint property of the spouses.
Can income from the property of one of the spouses be considered common property?
This is possible if the court establishes that the spouse participated in the maintenance of such property, in the management or care of it.