Official website of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

Rules for submitting an application to the registry office, in accordance with Resolution 15 of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

Resolution of Plenum 15 on divorce was adopted by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on November 5, 1998. This document regulates the resolution of controversial issues regarding the division of the common property of spouses, clarifies the concept of running a common household, clarifies the regime of joint ownership of a man and a woman, determines in which cases a marriage can be dissolved by the registry office, and so on.

The Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation on divorce stipulates the following points for the use of family law norms.

1. Filing a claim for termination of a marriage by a man who has a pregnant wife or is raising a child under the age of 1 year together is unacceptable without the written consent of the other half. The same rule applies to sad situations if the child is stillborn or does not live to see his first birthday. According to the Plenum of the Supreme Court on divorce, if the plaintiff, when filing an application, kept silent about the interesting situation of his wife or the presence of a young child, the case in court should be left without progress.
2. If citizens intending to divorce do not have joint children under the age of 18, then their union must be dissolved by the civil registry office, regardless of whether the couple has common property or claims for alimony payments to a disabled spouse in need. The court has the right to consider the case only if one of the parties refuses to sign the application for divorce by mutual consent.

The Supreme Court has corrected the practice of dividing property between former spouses

From the above provisions it follows that a legally significant circumstance when deciding whether to classify property as the common property of spouses is what funds (personal or general) and through what transactions (compensated or gratuitous) the property was acquired by one of the spouses during the marriage. Property acquired by one of the spouses during marriage through gratuitous civil law transactions (for example, by inheritance, donation, privatization) is not the common property of the spouses. The acquisition of property during marriage, but with funds that belonged to one of the spouses personally, also excludes such property from the regime of common joint property.

In accordance with Art. 34 of the RF IC, property acquired by spouses during marriage is their joint property. Property acquired by spouses during marriage (common property of spouses) includes the income of each spouse from labor activity, entrepreneurial activity and the results of intellectual activity, pensions, benefits received by them, as well as other monetary payments that do not have a special purpose (amounts of material assistance, amounts paid in compensation for damage due to loss of ability to work due to injury or other damage to health, and others). The common property of the spouses also includes movable and immovable things acquired at the expense of the spouses' common income, securities, shares, deposits, shares in capital contributed to credit institutions or other commercial organizations, and any other property acquired by the spouses during the marriage, regardless of whether in the name of which of the spouses it was purchased or in the name of which or which of the spouses contributed funds.

We recommend reading: Bailiff threatens shutdown

Clarifications of the Supreme Court regarding exceptional cases of divorce

1. If a person wants to divorce an incapacitated spouse, he can dissolve the family relationship through the registry office in an exceptional manner. However, Resolution of the Plenum 15 on divorce specifies that if incapacity is a temporary phenomenon resulting from excessive use of alcoholic beverages or drugs, then the divorce is carried out on a general basis.
2. This paragraph of the Plenum on divorce concerns the determination of the jurisdiction of divorce proceedings with a citizen serving a sentence in prison for up to three years. In order to file a claim, you need to contact the court at the place of residence of the convicted person before the announcement of the court verdict.
3. If a citizen intends to dissolve a marriage with a spouse whose place of residence is unknown for a long time, he has the right to file an application with the court at the last known address of residence or at the place where the property of the defendant is registered. At the same time, the Plenum of the Supreme Court on divorce secures the right of a citizen who has custody of a minor child to file an application at his place of residence.
4. Plenum 15 on divorce orders the judges, to whom the spouses of missing citizens have applied for a divorce, to explain to the applicant his legal right to declare the other half missing and to dissolve the marriage through the registry office. However, the same Plenum of the Supreme Court on divorce states that if the plaintiff refuses to initiate a case regarding the recognition of the spouse as disappeared, then he has the right to divorce in court.
5. This paragraph of the Plenum Resolution on divorce specifies the form of the lawsuit, the issues that may be raised for joint consideration with the divorce, as well as the list of documents that must accompany the document.
6. Explains the procedure for preparing for court proceedings.
7. The 1998 Plenum's explanation on divorce concerns the maintenance of minor children by the defendant during the trial period. The ruling of the RF Supreme Court also allows judges to impose on the defendant the obligation to pay alimony to the offspring while the case is being considered.
8. The paragraph explains the specifics of the application of the conciliation period, which is defined by law at three months. If, after the allotted period for reconciliation, the plaintiff still insists on ending the marriage relationship, then the union must be dissolved.

How is marital property divided during divorce?

Article 38 of the Family Code regulates that things that were acquired for the needs of minor children are not divided.

• income of each party from labor, entrepreneurial, intellectual activity, received pensions, benefits, other monetary payments that do not have a special purpose (material assistance, compensation for damage due to loss of ability to work, and others);
• movable and immovable property acquired with common income, securities, shares, deposits, shares in capital that were contributed to credit organizations, and any other things acquired during marriage.

We recommend reading: How much will the pension increase in 2020 for the liquidators of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant who receive a social pension

Explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court regarding the division of common property of divorcing citizens

1. Reserves to the court the right to divide jointly acquired property and assign financial support for the couple’s young offspring at its discretion, if the parties were unable to reach an agreement on their own, or the agreement reached by the spouses runs counter to the interests of the children. Also, this paragraph of the Plenum of the RF Armed Forces on divorce explains in which cases a marriage contract can be declared invalid and determines the methods of annulment of a family union.
2. If, as part of the divorce proceedings, the court decides the issue of dividing the joint property of the couple, which affects the interests of third parties, for example, members of a peasant farm or cooperative, with whom the spouses have not fully paid off, then the issue of allocating the shares of citizens should be discussed within the framework of a separate court production. Also, the Supreme Court Resolution determines the rights of credit institutions, as well as peasant farms, to present demands for the return of material obligations to both spouses.
3. In accordance with this paragraph, funds located in the accounts of minor offspring of spouses, children’s shares in property and securities registered in the name of minors cannot be discussed about the division of such deposits, even if they appeared on account of the total income of the parents.
4. In a situation where, as part of the divorce proceedings, demands are being considered for the preliminary allocation of a share of property for which citizens have not paid in full (obligations to buy out real estate or a plot of land), but require its immediate division, the court has the right to determine the share of each citizen within the framework of of this legal proceeding.
5. Explains the concept of common property of citizens, as well as the procedure for dividing property acquired after marriage, and determining its value, which must be followed during legal proceedings.
6. According to this clause of the Plenum on divorce, the judge can terminate the marriage contract if he means that one of the spouses is placed in an extremely disadvantageous position by its terms. In addition, the obligations of spouses regarding the division of common debts and financial obligations are clarified.
7. Determines when the court has the right to deviate from the beginning of equality of shares of husband and wife when dividing common property. We are talking not only about a story where one of the spouses did not receive income without a good reason or deliberately damaged material assets, but also about the disability of the second citizen, which arose as a result of deteriorating health during the marriage.
8. This clarification explains that when dividing jointly acquired property, the court must be guided by Articles 34, 35, 36, 37 of the RF IC.

Official website of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

On the application of legislation by courts when considering cases of divorce

(as amended by resolution of the Plenum of February 6, 2007 No. 6)

When considering cases of divorce, the courts have questions related to the application of the norms of the Family Code of the Russian Federation governing the termination of a marriage, its invalidation, as well as the property relations of spouses (former spouses). Taking this into account, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, in order to ensure the correct and uniform resolution of cases of this category, decides to give the following clarifications to the courts:

1. When accepting a statement of claim for divorce, the judge must take into account that, in accordance with Art. 17 of the RF IC, a husband does not have the right, without the consent of his wife, to initiate proceedings for divorce during the wife’s pregnancy and within one year after the birth of the child. This provision also applies to cases where the child was stillborn or died before reaching the age of one year. In the absence of the wife’s consent to consider the divorce case, the judge refuses to accept the statement of claim, and if it was accepted, the court terminates the proceedings (clause 1, part 1, article 134, paragraph two, article 220 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). These definitions are not an obstacle to re-applying to the court with a claim for divorce if the circumstances listed in Article 17 of the RF IC subsequently no longer exist.

2. Divorce by mutual consent of spouses who do not have common minor children, by virtue of clause 1 of Art. 19 of the RF IC is carried out in the civil registry office, regardless of the presence or absence of a dispute between spouses about the division of property that is their common joint property, about the payment of funds for the maintenance of a disabled spouse in need. The exception is cases when one of the spouses, despite his lack of objections, evades divorce, for example, refuses to submit a joint application for divorce or a separate application in the case when he is not able to personally appear at the civil registry office to submit joint statement (clause 2 of article 21 of the RF IC, article 33 of the Federal Law of November 15, 1997 “On Acts of Civil Status”).

3. Provided for in paragraph 2 of Art. 19 of the RF IC, the procedure for divorce in the civil registry office with persons declared incompetent due to a mental disorder does not apply to cases of divorce with persons limited in legal capacity due to alcohol or drug abuse. Divorce on claims brought against these persons, as well as on claims of these persons, is carried out in accordance with the general procedure.

4. Cases on divorce with persons sentenced to imprisonment are considered, if these cases are within the jurisdiction of the court, in compliance with the general rules on jurisdiction. If a claim for divorce from a person sentenced to imprisonment is accepted by the court for proceedings in accordance with Art. 28 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, then one must proceed from the last place of residence of the specified person before his conviction.

5. A claim for divorce from a person whose place of residence is unknown may be brought at the choice of the plaintiff, that is, at the last known place of residence of the defendant or at the location of his property, and in the case where the plaintiff has minor children or travel to the place the defendant’s residence is difficult for him due to health reasons - at his place of residence (parts 1 and 4 of article 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

6. Considering that, by virtue of clause 2 of Art. 19 of the RF IC, the dissolution of a marriage with persons recognized as missing, regardless of whether the spouses have common minor children, is carried out in the civil registry office, when filing such a claim against a person in respect of whom there is no information about him at his place of residence during the year. place of his stay, the judge explains to the plaintiff the procedure for recognizing citizens as missing (Article 42 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

However, if a spouse does not want to go to court with an application to recognize the other spouse as missing, the judge does not have the right to refuse to accept the claim for divorce, but must consider the claim on a general basis.

7. The statement of claim for divorce must meet the requirements of Art. Art. 131, 132 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation. It, in particular, indicates when and where the marriage was registered; whether there are common children, their ages; whether the spouses have reached an agreement on their maintenance and upbringing; in the absence of mutual consent to dissolve the marriage - the reasons for the dissolution of the marriage; Are there other claims that can be considered simultaneously with the claim for divorce. The application is accompanied by: a marriage certificate, copies of children’s birth certificates, documents on earnings and other sources of income of the spouses (if a claim for alimony is filed) and other necessary documents.

8. Having accepted the application for divorce, the judge in each case is obliged to prepare for the trial in the manner prescribed by Chapter 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

9. When postponing the proceedings on divorce and collection of alimony for children in connection with the appointment of a period for reconciliation of spouses, it is necessary to find out whether the defendant is involved in the maintenance of children. If the court finds that the defendant does not fulfill this obligation, he has the right, in accordance with Art. 108 of the RF IC to issue a resolution on temporary collection of alimony from the defendant until the final consideration of the case on divorce and collection of alimony.

10. In cases of divorce in cases where one of the spouses does not agree to terminate the marriage, the court, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 22 of the RF IC, has the right to postpone the hearing of the case, assigning the spouses a period for reconciliation within three months. Depending on the circumstances of the case, the court has the right, at the request of the spouse or on its own initiative, to postpone the hearing of the case several times, so that in total the period of time provided to the spouses for reconciliation does not exceed the three-month period established by law.

The period assigned for reconciliation may be reduced if the parties request it, and the reasons given by them are recognized by the court as valid. In these cases, a reasoned determination must be made.

The court's ruling to postpone the hearing of the case for the reconciliation of the spouses cannot be appealed through the appellate and cassation procedures, since it does not exclude the possibility of further progress of the case (Clause 2, Part 1, Article 371 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

If, after the expiration of the period set by the court, the reconciliation of the spouses has not taken place and at least one of them insists on ending the marriage, the court will dissolve the marriage.

11. In the event that, upon divorce, it is established in court that the spouses have not reached an agreement on which of them will live with minor children, on the procedure and amount of funds to be paid for the maintenance of children and (or) a disabled, needy spouse , as well as on the division of the common property of the spouses, or it is established that such an agreement has been reached, but it violates the interests of the children or one of the spouses, the court resolves these issues on the merits simultaneously with the requirement for divorce.

Simultaneously with the claim for divorce, a claim for recognition of the marriage contract as invalid in whole or in part may also be considered, since such claims are interconnected (Article 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). The court has the right, in the same proceedings, to consider the defendant’s counterclaim to declare the marriage invalid (Article 138 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

12. When deciding on the possibility of considering a claim for division of the spouses’ common property in divorce proceedings, it is necessary to keep in mind that in cases where the division of property affects the interests of third parties (for example, when the property is the property of a peasant (farm) enterprise or the property of a housing construction or another cooperative, the member of which has not yet fully paid his share contribution, and therefore has not acquired ownership of the corresponding property allocated to him by the cooperative for use, etc.), to the court in accordance with paragraph 3 of Art. 24 of the RF IC, it is necessary to discuss the issue of separating this requirement into separate proceedings.

The rule provided for in paragraph 3 of Article 24 of the RF IC on the inadmissibility of dividing the property of spouses in divorce proceedings, if the dispute about it affects the rights of third parties, does not apply to cases of division of deposits made by spouses to credit organizations at the expense of common income, regardless of whether , in the name of which spouse the funds were deposited, since when dividing such deposits, the rights of banks or other credit organizations are not affected.

If third parties provided the spouses with funds and the latter deposited them in their names in credit institutions, third parties have the right to file a claim for the return of the corresponding amounts in accordance with the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which is subject to consideration in separate proceedings. In the same manner, claims of members of a peasant (farm) enterprise and other persons against spouses who are members of a peasant (farm) enterprise may be resolved.

Contributions made by spouses at the expense of common property in the name of their minor children, by virtue of clause 5 of Article 38 of the RF IC, are considered to belong to the children and should not be taken into account when dividing property that is the common joint property of the spouses.

13. In the case where, simultaneously with the claim for divorce, a claim for the collection of alimony for children is filed, but the other party disputes the entry about the father or mother of the child in the birth certificate, the court should discuss the issue of separating these claims from the divorce case for their joint consideration in separate proceedings (Article 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

14. If, when considering a case of divorce and division of property of the spouses (in cases where they have not fully paid the share for the apartment, dacha, garage, other building or premises provided by the cooperative for use), one of the parties asks to determine what share of the share accumulation it has the right, without raising the issue of dividing the share, the court has the right to consider such a claim without separating it into separate proceedings, provided that there are no other persons entitled to share accumulations, since this dispute does not affect the rights of cooperatives.

15. The common joint property of the spouses, subject to division (clauses 1 and 2 of Article 34 of the RF IC), is any movable and immovable property acquired by them during the marriage, which, by virtue of Art. Art. 128, 129, pp. 1 and 2 of Article 213 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation can be the object of property rights of citizens, regardless of which spouse’s name it was acquired or funds were deposited in, unless the marriage contract between them establishes a different regime for this property. The division of the common property of the spouses is carried out according to the rules established by Articles 38, 39 of the RF IC and Article 254 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The value of the property to be divided is determined during the consideration of the case.

If the marriage contract changes the statutory regime of joint ownership, then the court, when resolving a dispute about the division of property of the spouses, must be guided by the terms of such agreement. It should be borne in mind that, by virtue of clause 3 of Article 42 of the RF IC, the conditions of the marriage contract on the regime of joint property, which put one of the spouses in an extremely unfavorable position (for example, one of the spouses is completely deprived of the right of ownership of property acquired by the spouses during the marriage) may be declared invalid by the court at the request of this spouse.

The property subject to division includes the common property of the spouses that they have at the time of consideration of the case or that is in the possession of third parties. When dividing property, the common debts of the spouses are also taken into account (clause 3 of Article 39 of the RF IC) and the right to claim obligations arising in the interests of the family.

Property acquired as a gift or by inheritance, as well as things for individual use, with the exception of jewelry and other luxury items, is not considered jointly owned, although acquired during marriage, but with the personal funds of one of the spouses that belonged to him before marriage. Article 36 of the RF IC).

16. Considering that in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 35 of the RF IC, ownership, use and disposal of the common property of the spouses must be carried out by their mutual consent, in the case when, when considering the requirement for the division of joint property of the spouses, it is established that one of them alienated the common property, or spent it at his own discretion, contrary to the will of the other spouse and not in the interests of the family, or hid the property; during the division, this property or its value is taken into account.

If, after the actual termination of family relations and running a common household, the spouses did not acquire property jointly, the court, in accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 38 of the RF IC, can divide only that property that was their common joint property at the time of the termination of the common household.

17. When dividing property that is the common joint property of spouses, the court, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 39 of the RF IC, may in some cases deviate from the beginning of equality of shares of the spouses, taking into account the interests of minor children and (or) the interests of one of the spouses that deserve attention. The noteworthy interests of one of the spouses should, in particular, be understood not only as cases where a spouse, without good reason, did not receive income or spent the common property of the spouses to the detriment of the interests of the family, but also cases where one of the spouses, due to health reasons or other reasons, due to circumstances beyond his control, he is deprived of the opportunity to receive income from work.

The court is obliged to provide in its decision the reasons for the deviation from the beginning of equality of shares of the spouses in their common property.

18. Since, in accordance with the legislation in force before the issuance of the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of July 8, 1944, an unregistered marriage had the same legal consequences as a registered one on property acquired jointly by persons who were in family relationships without registering the marriage, before the marriage By virtue of the Decree, the regime of common joint property of spouses applies. Based on clause 6 of Article 169 of the RF IC, when resolving a dispute over the division of such property, it is necessary to be guided by the rules established by Articles 34 - 37 of the RF IC.

19. The running of the three-year limitation period for claims for the division of property that is the common joint property of spouses whose marriage is dissolved (clause 7 of Article 38 of the RF IC) should not be calculated from the time of termination of the marriage (the day of state registration of the divorce in the register of deeds civil status upon divorce in the civil registry office, and upon divorce in court - the day the decision entered into legal force), and from the day when the person learned or should have learned about the violation of his right (clause 1 of Article 200 of the Civil Code RF).

20. The court's decision on divorce must be legal and based on evidence that has been comprehensively verified in court.

In the reasoning part of the decision in the case where one of the spouses objected to the dissolution of the marriage, the reasons established by the court for the discord between the spouses and evidence of the impossibility of preserving the family are indicated.

The operative part of the decision to satisfy the claim for divorce must contain the court's conclusions on all the claims of the parties, including those combined for joint consideration. This part of the decision also indicates the information necessary for state registration of divorce in the civil registration book (date of marriage registration, registration number, name of the body that registered the marriage). The surnames of the spouses are recorded in the decision in accordance with the marriage certificate, and if the surname is changed upon marriage, the premarital surname must also be indicated in the introductory part of the decision.

Considering that the amount of the fee for state registration of divorce carried out in court is established in sub-clause. 2 clause 1 art. 33326 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation,” when making a decision, the court does not determine from which of the spouses and in what amount the state fee for registering a divorce with the civil registry office is to be collected.

21. In accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 25 of the RF IC, a marriage dissolved in court is considered terminated from the day the court decision enters into legal force. The specified provision by virtue of clause 3 of Art. 169 of the RF IC does not apply to cases where the marriage was dissolved in court before May 1, 1996, that is, before the date of entry into force of Article 25 of the RF IC. A marriage dissolved by the civil registry office is considered terminated from the date of state registration of the divorce in the civil registry book, regardless of when the marriage was dissolved - before May 1, 1996 or after this date.

22. When accepting a statement of claim to declare a marriage invalid, the judge must find out on what basis the validity of the marriage is being disputed (clause 1 of Article 27 of the RF IC) and whether the plaintiff belongs to the category of persons who, by virtue of clause 1 of Article 28 of the RF IC, have the right raise the issue of declaring the marriage invalid precisely on this basis. If the applicant does not belong to such persons, the judge refuses to accept his statement of claim on the basis of clause 1, part 1, article 134 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation.

23. The list of grounds for declaring a marriage invalid, contained in clause 1 of Article 27 of the RF IC, is exhaustive and is not subject to broad interpretation. These grounds include: violation of the statutory conditions for marriage (Article 12.13 of the RF IC); the presence of circumstances during marriage that prevent its conclusion (Article 14 of the RF IC); concealment by one of the persons entering into marriage from another person of the presence of a sexually transmitted disease or HIV infection (Clause 3 of Article 15 of the RF IC); fictitious marriage (clause 1 of article 27 of the RF IC).

Taking this into account, a violation of the requirements established by law for the procedure for concluding a marriage (for example, registering a marriage before the expiration of a month from the date of filing an application with the civil registry office, if this period has not been reduced in the manner provided for in paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the RF IC ) cannot be a basis for declaring a marriage invalid.

24. In accordance with paragraph 4 of Article 29 of the RF IC, spouses after a divorce (both in court and in the civil registry office) do not have the right to raise the issue of declaring this marriage invalid, except in cases where the validity of the marriage is disputed based on the presence between spouses of a degree of kinship prohibited by law or the condition of one of them at the time of registration of marriage in another undissolved marriage.

If in the above cases the marriage is dissolved in court, then the claim for recognition of such a marriage as invalid can be considered by the court provided that the decision on divorce is canceled, since, in making such a decision, the court proceeded from the fact of the validity of the marriage. According to Part 2 of Article 209 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the facts and legal relations established by such a decision cannot be challenged by the same parties in another proceeding.

If the marriage is dissolved by the civil registry office, and subsequently demands are made to cancel the record of divorce and to declare it invalid, the court has the right to consider these demands in one proceeding (Article 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation).

Clarifications of the Supreme Court regarding the completion of divorce proceedings

1. The clarification concerns the procedure for counting the statute of limitations for filing property claims after a divorce. The statute of limitations is determined not from the moment the court decision on divorce enters into legal force, but from the moment the person applying for division is informed about the violation of his rights to common property.
2. The resolution of the Plenum on divorce cases explains the procedure for drawing up a court decision on divorce, the rules for writing its parts, as well as the procedure for collecting a fee to the state treasury established by the court.
3. The clause clarifies that family relationships are considered terminated from the moment the court decision enters into force, that is, one month after registration. If the family union is terminated through the registry office, then the date of its end is the date of entry in the civil registration books.
4. Explains to the court its right to refuse to accept an application for annulment of a marriage union if the plaintiff does not fall into the category of citizens entitled to file such a claim.
5. Concerns the problem of annulment of a marriage. If a citizen raises the question of the validity of a marriage in court, then the list of reasons for this cannot diverge from those specified in Articles 12, 13, 14 of the Family Code, 3 parts of Article 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, 1 part of Article 27 of the IC of Russia.
6. The resolution of the Plenum on divorce states that after the fact of divorce, citizens cannot demand that the dissolved union be declared invalid. The only exceptions to the question of recognizing this marriage as annulled are situations where it turns out that these persons are closely related or one of them is a bigamist. In such a situation, the decision to divorce may be declared invalid by the court.

All of the above issues, explained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, were included in the list for a reason. The plenum on divorce is a reflection of the most common problematic situations when considering cases of dissolution of family unions. Each clarification was based on a specific divorce case that received wide publicity and became a precedent for the legal community.

Plenum of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation On the Division of Jointly Acquired Property of Spouses

In the reasoning part of the decision in the case where one of the spouses objected to the dissolution of the marriage, the reasons established by the court for the discord between the spouses and evidence of the impossibility of preserving the family are indicated.

Property acquired as a gift or by inheritance, as well as things for individual use, with the exception of jewelry and other luxury items, is not considered jointly owned, although acquired during marriage, but with the personal funds of one of the spouses that belonged to him before marriage. Article 36 of the RF IC).

Where to file a claim for divorce

9. When postponing the proceedings on divorce and collection of alimony for children in connection with the appointment of a period for reconciliation of spouses, it is necessary to find out whether the defendant is involved in the maintenance of children. If the court finds that the defendant does not fulfill this obligation, he has the right, in accordance with Art. 108 of the RF IC to issue a resolution on temporary collection of alimony from the defendant until the final consideration of the case on divorce and collection of alimony. 10. In cases of divorce in cases where one of the spouses does not agree to the termination of the marriage, the court in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 22 of the RF IC has the right to postpone the trial of the case, assigning the spouses a period for reconciliation within three months. Depending on the circumstances of the case, the court has the right, at the request of the spouse or on its own initiative, to postpone the hearing of the case several times, so that in total the period of time provided to the spouses for reconciliation does not exceed the three-month period established by law. The period assigned for reconciliation may be reduced if the parties request it, and the reasons given by them are recognized by the court as valid. In these cases, a reasoned determination must be made. The court's ruling to postpone the hearing of the case for the reconciliation of the spouses cannot be appealed through the appellate and cassation procedures, since it does not exclude the possibility of further progress of the case (clause 2, part 1, article 371 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). (as amended by the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 02/06/2007 N 6)

We recommend reading: Child support in 2021, amount of non-working person

Plenum of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation On the Division of Jointly Acquired Property of Spouses

In the cassation appeal of the representative Nabiev F.M. – Khakimova N.K. The question is raised about the cancellation of the above court decision on the grounds that the court incorrectly divided the homeownership located at the address: . ; the court did not apply Part 2 of Art. 39 of the Family Code of the Russian Federation, since part of the gifts from parents in the amount of . rub. were spent by Nabiev F.M. for the construction of a house; the court did not take into account the inconsistency in the testimony of Full Name1 and Full Name2 about the amount received from the sale of the apartment located at the address: . ; the court unreasonably refused to recover from the defendant. rubles received by Nabieva F.M. under a loan agreement, since these funds were received during the spouses’ cohabitation; the court unreasonably refused to collect legal expenses for the services of representatives, in the presence of relevant evidence in the case materials.

As follows from the case materials, Nabiev F.M. filed a lawsuit in which he indicated that he was asking to leave the unfinished house in his ownership. The plaintiff did not make any demands for the division of the residential building in kind; they were not the subject of consideration of this case; the plaintiff did not submit a request for an examination to determine the possibility of allocating a share of the residential building in kind. In this connection, the court unreasonably divided the above-mentioned house according to the proposed expert opinion from. year no. option (ld.), and recovered from the defendant the costs of conducting the said examination.

07 Jun 2021 etolaw 1693

Share this post

Related Posts
• Urgent purchase of plots in the Moscow region
• How to make changes to your tax account when changing your place of residence
• Article 219 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation Social Tax Deductions With Comments 2020
• How many years do you need to work before becoming a veteran in the Tver region?

Plenum of the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation, division of jointly acquired property

You can get legal advice in our offices. Also, by prior agreement, we can meet in your office or other convenient places. All consultations are paid. Consultations in the evening and at night are calculated at a double rate. Evening time - after 20:00, night time - after 23:00 (Moscow time).

This is not at all necessary. The Internet is full of online consultants, including paid legal consultations

, You can consult any other legal consultation, but the main thing is that you get the information you need and trust the source of this information, and preferably be familiar with it.

Plenum on divorce consultant

15. The common joint property of the spouses, subject to division (clauses 1 and 2 of Article 34 of the RF IC), is any movable and immovable property acquired by them during the marriage, which, by virtue of Art. Art. 128, 129, paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 213 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation can be the object of property rights of citizens, regardless of which spouse’s name it was acquired or funds were deposited in, unless the marriage contract between them establishes a different regime for this property. The division of the common property of the spouses is carried out according to the rules established by Art. Art. 38, 39 RF IC and Art. 254 Civil Code of the Russian Federation. The value of the property to be divided is determined during the consideration of the case.

Resolution of the plenum on divorce

23. The list of grounds for declaring a marriage invalid, contained in clause 1 of Article 27 of the RF IC, is exhaustive and is not subject to broad interpretation. These grounds include: violation of the statutory conditions for marriage (Article 12.13 of the RF IC); the presence of circumstances during marriage that prevent its conclusion (Article 14 of the RF IC); concealment by one of the persons entering into marriage from another person of the presence of a sexually transmitted disease or HIV infection (Clause 3 of Article 15 of the RF IC); fictitious marriage (clause 1 of article 27 of the RF IC).