As the full-scale war started, Ukrainian courts have been increasingly dealing with motions for a stay of proceedings in alimony cases, including those involving changes in alimony collection methods/amounts. As the key argument, the respondents mostly rely upon their service in the Armed Forces of Ukraine and, therefore, being unable to attend the proceedings.
Reasoning behind the motions for a stay of proceedings
At first glance, there is indeed a legal foundation underlying such claims. Thus, Article 251 (1) (2) of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine clearly states that a court is obligated to stay proceedings if the litigant serves in the Armed Forces of Ukraine or other military units put on a war footing or engaged in military operations.
Conscription as an insufficient ground
However, proceeding from the case law, it appears that the military service alone is not sufficient to suspend the proceedings automatically. According to the spousal support lawyer from Alva Privacy, the judgment of the Supreme Curt dated 13 March 2025 and rendered in case No. 557/1226/23 may serve as an example here.
As part of this case, the respondent provided the court with an official certificate of military service but was unable to prove that her military unit was in fact put on a war footing or engaged in active combat actions. In addition, the servicewoman turned out to continue signing procedural documents, maintaining contacts through her legal representative, and actually participated in the proceedings.
The principle of the best interests of the child
The Supreme Court stressed that, under the circumstances, it would be premature to stay the proceedings and such stay would violate the balance of interests of the parties involved in the proceedings. The best interests of the child are of the utmost importance and, as stated in Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, in all actions concerning children ... the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration
.
Criteria for suspending proceedings
Based on the aforementioned judgment, the Supreme Court has clearly articulated the terms and conditions that should be met to justify the stay of proceedings involving a military service member:
- the military unit having the status of being actually put on a war footing or actively engaged in combat operations;
- the respondent’s duties being of such nature that directly involves engagement in combat missions;
- the respondent being actually prevented from attending court hearings in any way, either in person, by video conference, or through an authorized representative.
Recommendations and implications for litigants
Such legal position has practical implications for those military service members who are involved in alimony proceedings, either as claimants or as respondents:
- For claimants: claimants should not agree immediately to the suspension of the trial merely because the respondent has been conscripted. It is essential to find out the real conditions of his or her military service and verify whether he or she is able to participate in the proceedings or not.
- For respondents: to support a stay motion, it is necessary to provide detailed evidence identifying the nature of the military service and the status of the military unit and proving that it is in fact impossible to participate in the proceedings.
Implications and guidelines for judicial practice
This judgment of the Supreme Court lay down important guidelines for inferior courts. It shows how to combine respect for military duty of citizens and protection of children's rights to proper maintenance.
This becomes especially relevant in the context of changing collection methods or amounts of child support when a change in the circumstances can significantly affect the child's financial status. To learn more about the procedure for changing alimony, please read our dedicated publication.
Written by Sofiia Ohiievych, Lawyer.
