Division of Property in De Facto Marital Relationships: What Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine Provides

Property acquired by a man and a woman while living together as a family without registering a marriage can be recognized as their joint property. Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine expressly provides for this.

This regime, however, does not arise automatically from the mere fact of living together. A partner claiming a share must prove in court two separate sets of facts — that the couple actually lived as a family during a defined period without either being married to someone else, and that the specific disputed asset was acquired during that period with joint funds or through joint effort.

That is why the rule of thumb "everything bought together is split fifty-fifty" does not apply to such relationships. Shared photos, vacations, or even a common registered address are not grounds for division without evidence of a shared budget, a shared household, and a financial contribution to the property.

What a de facto marital relationship is and whether a "civil marriage" is legally a marriage

The term "civil marriage," widely used in Ukraine for couples who live together without registering a marriage (what English speakers often call a common-law marriage), is colloquial and does not appear in the law. The legally correct terms are "de facto marital relationship" or "living together as a family without marriage registration."

This arrangement is not a marriage within the meaning of the Family Code. It is a separate legal status to which the law attaches its own, limited set of legal consequences, primarily financial ones.

Signs of living together as a family without registering a marriage

The basic definition of a family is set out in Article 3 of the Family Code of Ukraine. A family consists of persons who live together, share a common household, and have mutual rights and obligations.

In a property dispute, this general definition is not enough to establish the fact of a family — a combination of specific signs is required.

When deciding whether a couple lived together as a family without registering a marriage, the court must establish that they lived together as a family, that they shared a household, and that they had mutual rights and obligations (Articles 3 and 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Each of these signs is revealed through specific facts. That is why, to establish that a man and a woman lived together as a family without marriage, the court must consider all the characteristics typical of spouses taken together.

The facts to be proven in such cases were defined in the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of July 3, 2019, case No. 554/8023/15-ц.

However, none of these signs on its own is a sufficient basis for establishing the fact. Courts consistently reject reliance on isolated episodes of life together.

How a de facto marital relationship differs from a registered marriage

The difference is defined directly in Article 21 of the Family Code of Ukraine. Only a family union registered with the state civil registration authority is recognized as a marriage.

Living together as a family without registering a marriage does not, in itself, give rise to the rights and obligations of spouses.

Accordingly, partners in a de facto marital relationship do not automatically acquire the full range of rights enjoyed by spouses, including personal non-property rights, the right to support from each other, and the status that matters in inheritance by law.

The exception the legislature has made for this category of persons concerns the property regime and is governed by Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

A de facto marital relationship is therefore not a full equivalent of marriage but a separate and limited legal recognition that covers the joint ownership regime for property acquired while living together.

What Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine provides

When Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine applies

Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine creates an exception to the general rule of Article 21(2), under which living together as a family without marriage does not give rise to the rights and obligations of spouses.

Under this exception, a woman and a man who live together as a family without registering a marriage acquire joint ownership of property acquired while they live together. Article 74(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine reads as follows.

"If a woman and a man live together as a family but are not married to each other or to anyone else, property acquired by them while living together belongs to them under the right of joint ownership, unless otherwise established by a written agreement between them."

The rule applies only when three conditions are met at the same time. The first is an established fact of living together as a family.

The second is the absence of a registered marriage both between the partners themselves and between either of them and any third person. The third is that the property was acquired during that period of living together.

The joint ownership regime applies unless a written agreement between the parties provides otherwise.

When these conditions are met, the provisions of Chapter 8 of the Family Code of Ukraine, "Right of Joint Ownership of Spouses," apply to property jointly owned by the woman and the man (Article 74(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Why it matters that neither partner is in another registered marriage

This requirement rests on the principle of monogamy set out in Article 25 of the Family Code of Ukraine. Under that article, a woman and a man may be in only one marriage at a time and may remarry only after the previous marriage has ended.

The Supreme Court has held that not being married to anyone else is a mandatory precondition for establishing a de facto marital relationship.

"…a necessary condition for establishing the fact of living together is, among other things, that the persons are not in any other marriage. […] A court's finding that persons lived together as a family without registering a marriage amounts to the state's recognition of their family relationship and is, in essence, an alternative to a registered marriage; such a relationship must therefore be lawful."

Source: judgment of the Yavoriv District Court of Lviv Region of June 16, 2025, case No. 460/1646/19 (citing the Supreme Court ruling of May 13, 2024, case No. 727/8026/23).

In practice, this principle leads courts to split periods of cohabitation depending on whether either partner was in a registered marriage with another person.

In the case cited, the man had been in a registered marriage with another woman until December 2009. Although he was in fact living with the claimant during that time, the court established that they lived together as a family only from the date the judgment dissolving that marriage became final.

An undissolved marriage of one partner to another person therefore rules out recognizing the corresponding period as living together as a family within the meaning of Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

When property in a civil marriage is jointly owned

Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine provides that property acquired by a woman and a man while living together as a family without registering a marriage belongs to them under the right of joint ownership.

What is distinctive about this rule is that it contains no rules of its own on exercising this right or dividing the property. Instead, it refers to Chapter 8 of the Family Code of Ukraine, "Right of Joint Ownership of Spouses."

As a result, the rules on objects of joint ownership, disposal of such property, division, and determination of shares established for spouses also apply to the property of cohabiting partners.

In particular, the presumption that property acquired while living together is jointly owned, set out in Article 60(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine, extends to cohabiting partners. This presumption is rebuttable.

Each partner may challenge the application of the joint ownership regime to a particular asset, including in court. The burden of proof lies with the party seeking to rebut the presumption, who must prove the relevant circumstances with proper and admissible evidence (ruling of the Supreme Court, panel of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court, of May 10, 2023, case No. 215/1191/17).

Property may be given the status of joint ownership based on the time it was acquired, the funds used to acquire it (the source of acquisition), and the purpose of the acquisition, which determines whether it may be given the legal status of spousal joint property.

Accordingly, when resolving a property division dispute, the court must both establish the scope of the jointly acquired property and determine when and from what sources it was acquired.

When deciding whether a couple lived together as a family without registering a marriage, the court must establish that they lived together as a family, shared a household, and had mutual rights and obligations. A similar legal conclusion is set out in the Supreme Court rulings of October 5, 2022, case No. 686/15993/21; November 9, 2022, case No. 753/10315/19; and November 16, 2022, case No. 199/3941/20.

The joint ownership regime therefore extends to the property of a woman and a man who are not married to each other only when several conditions are met together. It must be established that they lived together as a family, that neither of them was in another marriage during that period, and that the disputed property was acquired during that period.

When these conditions are met, the presumption of joint ownership applies.

Property purchased with joint funds

Property purchased with joint funds is property acquired by a woman and a man while living together as a family using income they earned during that period and spent on the family's needs.

Such income includes wages, pensions, stipends, business income, and other receipts of each of them, whether contributed to the family budget or received into a personal account (Article 61(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine), as well as money and other property received by one of them under a contract concluded in the interests of the family (Article 61(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

So, for the purpose of establishing a shared budget, it does not matter which partner earned the money or in whose name the account is held. What matters is that the partners managed these funds together in the interests of the family and jointly covered family expenses.

At the same time, a shared budget does not make all of the partners' money joint. Funds acquired while living together are jointly owned unless they are the separate property of one partner, for example, received by that partner as a gift or by inheritance.

Property acquired through joint effort

The concept of "joint effort" is interpreted broadly in this context and is not limited to working together directly on acquiring a particular asset.

"…property acquired as a result of the joint effort of such persons as a family (the joint effort of persons should be understood as their joint or individual work, as a result of which they received joint or personal income later combined to acquire joint property, run a common household, and maintain a common way of life and budget)."

Source: ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of July 3, 2019, case No. 554/8023/15-ц.

Property registered in the name of only one partner

The fact that title is registered in the name of one partner has no independent significance for determining the legal regime of the property.

"Any type of property, except property that by law cannot belong to them (withdrawn from civil circulation), may be the joint property of a woman and a man who lived together as a family but were not married to each other or to anyone else, regardless of in whose name it was acquired."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of May 10, 2023, case No. 215/1191/17.

Property that is not divided as joint property

The previous section explained that, for persons who live together as a family but are not married to each other or to anyone else, the law establishes a presumption that acquired property is jointly owned.

Yet even in a registered marriage there are exceptional circumstances in which acquired property is not jointly owned. They are defined in Article 57 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

The Supreme Court ruling of May 10, 2023, case No. 215/1191/17, addresses this issue as follows.

"…in Articles 57 and 58 of the Family Code of Ukraine, the legislature defined the cases in which, for spouses, property is separate personal property. The same approach must be applied to a woman and a man who lived together as a family but were not married to each other or to anyone else. In particular, the separate personal property of a woman and a man who lived together as a family but were not married to each other or to anyone else includes: property acquired by her or him before living together as a family; property acquired by her or him while living together as a family, but under a gift agreement or by inheritance; property acquired by her or him while living together as a family, but with funds that belonged to her or him personally."

Under the same approach, each partner's separate property also includes items for individual use, including jewelry, even if purchased with joint funds (Article 57(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Bonuses and awards received by one partner for personal merit are also separate property. However, a court may recognize the other partner's right to a share of such a bonus or award if that partner contributed to obtaining it, for example by running the household or raising children (Article 57(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Insurance payouts and surrender values received under life and health insurance contracts are also separate property (Article 57(5) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Property acquired before the partners began living together

What matters here is when title was acquired relative to the start of the de facto marital relationship.

If property was acquired outside the period the court recognizes as living together as a family, it remains the separate property of the partner who acquired it — even if the couple later lived together for many years.

"Apartment ADDRESS_3 belonged to PERSON_1 as separate personal property, since he acquired it in 2007, that is, before he began living with PERSON_2 (January 2009). Under Article 57 of the Family Code of Ukraine (which applies by analogy to persons living together as a family without registering a marriage, pursuant to Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine), such property is separate personal property."

Source: judgment of the Saltivskyi District Court of Kharkiv of July 2, 2026, case No. 643/15465/24.

In disputes of this kind, the exact start and end dates of cohabitation are a separate fact to be proven, and the legal status of each specific asset depends directly on them.

Property purchased with personal funds

Personal funds include both savings accumulated before the couple began living together and proceeds from the sale of property that was the separate property of one partner.

A reference to "personal funds" cannot be taken into account if those funds were received in a transaction that did not comply with the required form. A gift of a significant sum of money must be notarized (Article 719(5) of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

Failure to meet this requirement makes the agreement void and deprives any reference to a "gift" of evidentiary value.

"The court is critical of and rejects PERSON_2's argument that the funds of UAH 1,000,000.00 spent on the disputed house are her separate personal property because she received them as a gift from her mother […], since the gift agreement in the case file, contrary to the requirements of Article 719 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, was not notarized and, by virtue of Article 220 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, is void and therefore cannot be proper and admissible evidence."

Source: judgment of the Boryspil City District Court of Kyiv Region of December 23, 2025, case No. 359/6283/23.

Property received as a gift or by inheritance

Property acquired by one partner while living together under a gift agreement or by inheritance is classified as separate property because of the basis on which it was acquired.

That basis is not the partners' joint effort or joint funds but a separate legal fact — a gift agreement (in particular, Articles 717 and 722 of the Civil Code of Ukraine) or inheritance (in particular, Articles 1216, 1218, 1223, and 1268 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

In both cases, title arises without any financial or labor contribution from the other partner. The fact that the couple lived together at the time of acquisition therefore does not change the legal regime of the property, and it is not divided as joint property.

What must be proven to establish joint ownership

Recognizing property as the joint property of persons living together as a family without registering a marriage requires proving two sets of facts, which are established separately. The first is that the couple lived together as a family within clearly defined dates.

The second is that the specific disputed asset was acquired during that period. A lack of evidence for either set is an independent ground for dismissing the claim, even if the other set is fully proven.

The fact of living together as a family

What must be proven is not the existence of a relationship as such but a combination of signs of a family relationship that distinguish living together as a family from any other form of cohabitation or personal relationship.

Living together as a family cannot be reduced to any single sign (a shared address, a shared budget, a common household, a common child) and can be established only when these signs are taken together.

In its ruling of June 7, 2023, case No. 509/3416/18, the Supreme Court explained that living together means a man and a woman actually and permanently residing at the same address, keeping most of their belongings there, including items of everyday use, and regarding that place as their main home, even if either of them must be away for long periods because of the nature of their work or service (military service, rotational work).

A shared household, in turn, means that the woman and the man run a common household, have a shared budget and expenses, acquire property for common use, including with joint funds and through joint effort, jointly maintain and repair their home, eat together, and care for and help each other.

The rights and obligations typical of spouses include, in particular but not exclusively, the existence and exercise by the man and the woman of the personal non-property rights provided for in Chapter 6 of the Family Code of Ukraine. It is precisely the combination of these established circumstances and relations that must be found and proven.

The period of the de facto marital relationship

Courts take a strict approach to establishing this period, and failure to prove the dates is one of the most common reasons property division claims are dismissed. A claim may be dismissed simply because the claimant did not state a specific period of cohabitation.

Since the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of January 23, 2024, case No. 523/14489/15-ц, this period is stated not in the prayer for relief as a separate claim but in the grounds of the claim as a fact to be proven.

A claim may also be dismissed for lack of evidence supporting the stated period or, for example, because one partner was in a registered marriage with another person while the couple lived together.

"…the claimant did not specify the period for which he asks the court to establish that a man and a woman lived together without registering a marriage. The lower courts noted this circumstance and correctly held that the fact of living together cannot be established without the claimant specifying the period to be established."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of October 11, 2023, case No. 759/14612/18.

"…the parties could not have lived together as a family from 2006 until their marriage in August 2009, because it was established that from 2008 PERSON_1 lived as a family with [another person]…"

Source: judgment of the Ternopil City District Court of Ternopil Region of February 6, 2026, case No. 607/13254/22.

A shared household and a shared budget

The evidence here consists of the everyday circumstances partners deal with while living together as a family.

These include jointly maintaining and repairing the home, jointly buying furniture and household appliances, eating together, and the partners caring for and helping each other in daily life.

This list also includes exercising the personal non-property rights typical of spouses, such as the right to motherhood and fatherhood, sharing family responsibilities, and making decisions about family life together.

These elements carry no less evidentiary weight than purely financial indicators and show that the relationship between the partners went beyond a personal or intimate one and took on the features of a settled family life typical of spouses.

"When establishing whether persons share a household, it is appropriate to take into account the features that define a household. A household is a group of persons who live together in one dwelling or part of it, provide themselves with everything necessary for life, run a common household, and fully or partially pool and spend their funds."

Source: Supreme Court order of July 11, 2025, case No. 548/2517/23.

"A mandatory condition for recognizing a man and a woman as being in a de facto marital relationship, in addition to the fact of living together, is a shared budget, eating together, buying property for common use, sharing the costs of maintaining and repairing the home, providing mutual assistance, oral or written arrangements on the use of the dwelling, and other circumstances confirming the reality of the family relationship."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of October 7, 2021, case No. 756/1512/19 (citing the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of July 3, 2019, case No. 554/8023/15-ц).

Joint participation in acquiring the specific property

Establishing that a couple lived together as a family does not yet settle the legal regime of any specific property. For each asset, the court separately determines when, with what funds, and for what purpose it was acquired.

"When deciding on the legal regime of such property, courts usually establish whether the parties created (acquired) the property as a result of joint effort, running a common household and a common way of life, and fulfilling mutual rights and obligations, and determine the time of acquisition, the source of acquisition (the funds used to acquire the property), and the purpose of acquisition, which allows the property to be given the legal status of joint ownership."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of July 22, 2026, case No. 372/6654/24.

Traditionally, proving joint participation in acquiring specific property relies on establishing the sources of income of both partners and their financial ability to make the purchase, as well as the circumstances of any loans or other financial obligations connected with acquiring the disputed property.

However, courts also accept proof of participation in the purchase not only through direct financial evidence (bank statements, receipts) but also indirectly, through the circumstances surrounding the transaction. A telling example comes from the Supreme Court order of July 11, 2025, case No. 548/2517/23.

"…the purchase of the apartment was discussed not only by the claimant and the respondent; the claimant's parents were actively involved in the transaction — they viewed the apartment, negotiated its price, collected documents, were personally present when the agreement was signed, and handed the money to the seller, which shows that the purchase was planned and points to the participation of both the claimant and the respondent in buying the apartment and, consequently, to a shared family budget."

Evidence that confirms a de facto marital relationship

The law does not set out an exhaustive list of evidence that can prove a couple lived together as a family. The court assesses the evidence as a whole, and no single item is either sufficient or mandatory on its own.

In its ruling of July 15, 2020, case No. 524/10054/16, the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court stated that even the respondent's admission that the couple lived together is not in itself a basis for establishing that fact. The court still examines the circumstances of the case.

The Supreme Court has provided an indicative list of such evidence in its case law.

"Proper and admissible evidence that a man and a woman lived together as a family without registering a marriage may include, in particular but not exclusively: children's birth certificates; certificates of place of residence; witness testimony; extracts from village household registers on registration or moving in; evidence of joint acquisition of both movable and immovable property (receipts, invoices, title certificates); applications, questionnaires, receipts, wills, business and personal correspondence showing that the 'spouses' regarded themselves as husband and wife and cared for each other; certificates from housing organizations and village councils on living together and running a household, and other evidence."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of August 20, 2026, case No. 444/2030/22 (citing the Supreme Court ruling of July 15, 2020, case No. 524/10054/16).

Documents confirming that the partners lived together

Living together is confirmed by registration of residence at the same address, certificates from a condominium association or building manager listing the residents, cohabitation reports, declarations with the same family doctor at the same address, and joint lease agreements.

Documents in which one partner listed the other as a family member (insurance, medical records, a bank application form) also carry evidentiary weight, as do birth certificates of common children listing both partners as parents.

Bank records, transfers, receipts, and loans

A shared budget is confirmed by account statements showing regular transfers between the partners, payment of joint expenses, and deposits by both partners into the same account.

Loan agreements in which the other partner is a guarantor or co-borrower, and receipts for loan repayments made on behalf of both partners, are also evidence. Receipts for furniture, appliances, and building materials for the shared home confirm a common household.

In its ruling of January 23, 2024, case No. 523/14489/15-ц, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court agreed that receipts and invoices for household appliances, furniture, and building materials confirm a common household and a shared budget.

Documents for real estate, vehicles, and other property

For specific property, the relevant documents include purchase agreements showing the date and price, payment records, and income statements of both partners for the period of the purchase.

This group also includes documents on the sale of previously owned property (to prove or rebut a personal source of funds), building permits, construction contracts, and invoices for materials.

Witness testimony, correspondence, photos, and other supporting evidence

Witnesses (neighbors, relatives, colleagues) confirm that they saw the partners as a family. Correspondence, photos from holidays and trips together, and social media posts show the nature of the relationship.

This evidence matters, but only as a supplement to documents. In its ruling of February 14, 2018, case No. 129/2115/15-ц, the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court expressly stated that witness testimony cannot be the sole basis for establishing the fact.

"Witness statements are a special type of evidence associated with the risk of a subjective attitude toward the parties, and the witnesses' statements in this case about the existence of a family relationship between the parties reflect their personal perception of the relationship between these persons; however, in themselves they cannot reliably show that the relationship had the features of a family one.

At the same time, witness testimony and joint photographs cannot be the sole basis for confirming that a man and a woman lived together as a family without registering a marriage."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of August 31, 2026, case No. 686/23946/23.

Evidence that may be insufficient on its own

Courts do not treat vacation photos, holidays spent together, or money transfers, taken on their own, as proof of living together as a family.

"…the fact that the parties vacationed together, attended holiday celebrations together, and that the respondent transferred money to the claimant's account cannot, in itself, without proof of running a common household, having a shared budget, and mutual rights and obligations typical of spouses, show that a settled relationship typical of spouses had formed and existed between the parties."

Source: Supreme Court rulings of August 15, 2019, case No. 588/350/15; March 19, 2020, case No. 303/2865/17; September 23, 2021, case No. 204/6931/20; and June 30, 2022, case No. 694/1540/20.

Such evidence shows that the partners were close. It does not show that they ran a common household, had a shared budget, and bore mutual obligations — in other words, that they lived as spouses.

How property is divided in a de facto marital relationship

There is no special procedure for dividing property acquired while living together as a family without registering a marriage. Partners can divide it either voluntarily or, if there is a dispute, in court.

Voluntary division and a written agreement

Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine expressly allows the partners to regulate their property relations by agreement. The joint ownership regime applies "unless otherwise established by a written agreement between them."

Such an agreement determines the property regime in advance but is not an agreement on dividing property that has already been acquired jointly.

It should be noted that such an agreement cannot be treated as a prenuptial agreement, since Article 92 of the Family Code of Ukraine grants the right to conclude one to persons in a registered marriage.

Partners' options for dividing property through a notary are significantly limited. A notary does not establish the fact of living together as a family and cannot recognize property registered in the name of only one partner as joint.

Division before a notary is therefore possible only when both partners are already registered as co-owners of the property. In that case, the division agreement is concluded under Article 372 of the Civil Code of Ukraine, as between ordinary co-owners, and must be notarized.

If the property is registered in the name of one partner, a share can be transferred to the other voluntarily only through a gift agreement or an agreement for the sale of a share. This, however, is no longer a division of joint property but a disposal of one's own property, with different legal and tax consequences.

Without such an arrangement, the right to a share can be recognized only in court.

Division of property in court

If the partners cannot agree, the dispute is resolved in contentious proceedings.

Claims concerning real estate are filed at the location of the property (exclusive jurisdiction, Article 30 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine), and the amount of the claim is determined by the value of the property in which the claimant seeks a share.

Which claims may be filed together

Establishing the fact of living together as a family

In a property division case, a claim to establish that the parties lived together as a family without registering a marriage is not filed separately. This fact is a ground of the claim, not its subject, and the court establishes it in the reasoning of the judgment as a fact to be proven.

If the claimant nevertheless files such a claim separately, the court will dismiss it, even if the fact of living together is proven.

This is exactly what the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court did in a case where the lower courts had established that the parties lived together as a family from September 2008 to April 2014.

The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court did not question that this fact had been proven, but it set aside the judgment insofar as it granted the claim to establish the fact and dismissed the claim in that part.

"The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court also notes that a claim to establish the fact of living together as a family without registering a marriage may be resolved in non-contentious civil proceedings, as provided for in Section IV of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, if there is no dispute between the parties. If a dispute over a right arises during non-contentious proceedings that must be resolved in contentious proceedings, the court leaves the application without consideration and explains to the interested persons that they may file a claim on general grounds. […] Claims to establish a legal fact are not claims that ensure effective protection of rights in cases on the division of spousal property, but merely a ground for resolving such a case."

Source: judgment of the Vinnytsia City Court of Vinnytsia Region of May 9, 2025, case No. 127/5895/23 (citing paragraphs 42 and 44 of the ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of January 23, 2024, case No. 523/14489/15-ц).

Recognizing property as jointly owned

According to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court, a claim to recognize specific assets as jointly owned is not necessary either. The court's decision merely confirms an existing ownership regime rather than creating it.

The scope of such joint property is a matter of proof.

Recognizing ownership of a share and dividing the property

The main and sufficient claim is a claim to recognize ownership of a share in specific property, to award an indivisible item to one party, or to recover monetary compensation for the value of the share.

How shares in joint property are determined

Under the general rule set out in Article 372 of the Civil Code of Ukraine and Article 69 of the Family Code of Ukraine, shares in joint property are equal, even if one partner had no independent earnings (income) for a valid reason (studies, running the household, caring for children, illness, and the like), in accordance with Article 60 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

What matters in principle is that equal shares do not depend on the ratio of the partners' incomes. A share is not determined in proportion to each partner's financial contribution to the purchase of a particular item.

For de facto marital relationships, however, this rule applies only after a preliminary stage of proof has been passed. For partners without a registered marriage, it must first be proven that the specific property was acquired as a family through joint effort and with joint funds.

After that, the ratio of each partner's income no longer affects the size of the shares.

A departure from the principle of equal shares is allowed only when there are circumstances of significant importance. The burden of proving such circumstances lies with the party seeking the departure.

"When resolving a property division dispute, the court may depart from the principle of equal shares of spouses in circumstances of significant importance, in particular if one of them did not provide for the family financially, evaded participation in supporting the child (children), concealed, destroyed, or damaged joint property, or spent it to the detriment of the family's interests."

Source: judgment of the Bila Tserkva City District Court of Kyiv Region of July 8, 2026, case No. 357/13410/23.

Article 70(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine provides a separate ground for increasing a share. By court decision, the share may be increased for the partner with whom the children live, as well as a disabled adult son or daughter, if the child support they receive is insufficient for their physical and spiritual development and medical treatment.

This provision is part of Chapter 8 of the Family Code of Ukraine and therefore extends to cohabiting partners through the reference in Article 74(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine.

Supreme Court practice in property disputes between de facto spouses

Every conclusion in this article is based on Supreme Court case law. Taken together, this case law forms several consistent approaches that determine the outcome of property disputes between de facto spouses.

What the Supreme Court considers sufficient evidence of a family relationship

The Supreme Court consistently holds that living together as a family can be established only by a combination of signs. These include living together, a shared household and budget, and mutual rights and obligations typical of spouses (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of July 3, 2019, case No. 554/8023/15-ц; Supreme Court ruling of October 7, 2021, case No. 756/1512/19).

The list of evidence remains open (Supreme Court ruling of August 20, 2026, case No. 444/2030/22). No single item is decisive on its own, and even the respondent's admission that the couple lived together does not relieve the court of examining that fact (Supreme Court ruling of July 15, 2020, case No. 524/10054/16).

Documents recording shared finances and a shared household carry the most weight. The Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court recognized that receipts and invoices for household appliances, furniture, and building materials confirm a common household and a shared budget (ruling of January 23, 2024, case No. 523/14489/15-ц).

Witness testimony and joint photographs, by contrast, are only supporting evidence (Supreme Court ruling of August 31, 2026, case No. 686/23946/23).

When courts refuse to recognize property as joint

Most often, a claim fails because the dates of cohabitation are not defined. The court will not establish the fact if the claimant has not specified a period (Supreme Court ruling of October 11, 2023, case No. 759/14612/18).

The second typical ground is that one partner was in another marriage. The Supreme Court regards not being in any other marriage as a mandatory condition for applying Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine (Supreme Court ruling of May 13, 2024, case No. 727/8026/23).

Claimants who can prove only isolated episodes of life together are also refused. Vacationing together, celebrating holidays, or money transfers, without proof of a common household, budget, and mutual obligations, do not indicate a family relationship (Supreme Court rulings of August 15, 2019, case No. 588/350/15; March 19, 2020, case No. 303/2865/17; September 23, 2021, case No. 204/6931/20; and June 30, 2022, case No. 694/1540/20).

Procedural errors form a separate group of grounds for refusal. A claim to establish the fact of living together as a family, filed separately in a property division case, is not a proper remedy, and the court dismisses it even when the fact itself is proven (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of January 23, 2024, case No. 523/14489/15-ц).

A claim may also be dismissed because the limitation period has expired if the claimant fails to prove when exactly they learned that their right had been violated (Supreme Court ruling of July 15, 2026, case No. 753/11522/20).

Why the fact of living together alone is not enough to divide specific property

An established fact of living together as a family only opens the way to applying Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine. The court determines the legal regime of each asset separately, looking at when, from what source, and for what purpose it was acquired (Supreme Court ruling of July 22, 2026, case No. 372/6654/24).

Property acquired while living together is presumed to be joint, but this presumption is rebuttable. The burden of proof lies with the party seeking to rebut it.

The rules on separate property also apply to cohabiting partners, in particular to property acquired before they began living together, received as a gift or by inheritance, or purchased with personal funds (Supreme Court ruling of May 10, 2023, case No. 215/1191/17).

Participation in acquiring specific property does not have to be proven by bank documents alone. The Supreme Court found the circumstances surrounding a purchase sufficient, including joint discussion of the purchase, involvement of family members in finding and paying for the apartment, and presence when the agreement was signed (Supreme Court order of July 11, 2025, case No. 548/2517/23).

Division of property acquired in a civil marriage before January 1, 2004

The date of January 1, 2004, is when the Family Code of Ukraine came into force. The Code on Marriage and Family of Ukraine, in effect until that date, contained no provision on the property rights of a woman and a man living together as a family without registering a marriage.

Such a provision first appeared in Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine.

"The Code on Marriage and Family of Ukraine, which was in force until January 1, 2004, contained no provision on a woman and a man who are not married to each other or to anyone else living together as a family. This provision is set out in Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine, which came into force on January 1, 2004.

Under the general rule on the temporal effect of laws and other regulations (Article 58(1) of the Constitution of Ukraine), the provisions of the Family Code of Ukraine apply to family relations that arose after it came into force, that is, no earlier than January 1, 2004. To family relations that existed before January 1, 2004, the provisions of the Family Code of Ukraine apply only with respect to rights and obligations that arose after it came into force."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of February 18, 2026, case No. 485/2263/24.

Property acquired by cohabiting partners before January 1, 2004, therefore does not become their joint property under Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine, even if they continued living together after that date.

For such property, both the legal basis and the facts to be proven are different. Rights to it are determined under the law in force at the time of acquisition, and the claimant must prove their own contribution to acquiring the property.

Limitation period in property division disputes

The law does not set a special limitation rule for the property of de facto spouses. Through Article 74(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine, Article 72 of the Family Code of Ukraine, which provides for a three-year limitation period, applies to such relationships.

For spouses, this period applies to a claim for division of property filed after divorce. Cohabiting partners do not divorce, so that part of the rule does not apply to them.

What remains decisive is the general starting point — the day one of the co-owners learned or could have learned that their property right had been violated.

At the same time, this rule does not give an unconditional right to go to court at any time after a long period has passed. A person's statement that they did not know their right had been violated does not in itself mean that the limitation period has not expired.

The moment when the person learned or objectively could have learned of the violation must also be established and proven in court.

"The claimant must also prove that he could not have learned of the violation of his civil right… The respondent, on the contrary, must prove that information about the violation could have been obtained earlier. The respondent's arguments that the claimant could have learned of the violated right earlier than he claims must be based not on possibilities but on specific circumstances confirmed by proper evidence in the case."

Source: Supreme Court ruling of July 15, 2026, case No. 753/11522/20.

What happens to the property after one partner dies

A partner is not among the first-priority heirs, since Article 1261 of the Civil Code of Ukraine covers only registered spouses (ruling of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of October 1, 2024, case No. 638/11578/21).

A partner may inherit by law only as a fourth-priority heir, provided they lived with the deceased as a family for at least five years before the inheritance opened (Article 1264 of the Civil Code of Ukraine), or under a will.

At the same time, the death of one partner does not change the legal regime of property acquired while living together. Only the deceased partner's share passes to the heirs (Article 1226 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

The surviving partner may therefore sue the heirs to recognize their ownership of their own share in the property acquired while living together. To do so, they must prove that the couple lived together as a family and the circumstances in which the disputed property was acquired.

How to protect property rights in an unregistered relationship in advance

Written agreements between partners

Article 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine allows partners to establish, by written agreement, a property regime other than joint ownership. Such an agreement is best concluded before or immediately after the property is purchased.

The law requires only a written form, but notarization reduces the risk that the agreement will be challenged.

Documenting the source of funds and contributions to major purchases

If the money for a purchase came from parents or from the sale of separate property, keep the sale agreement, the bank statement showing receipt of the funds, and the payment for the purchase as one unbroken chain.

If the partners contribute funds jointly, each should transfer their part from their own account with the purpose of payment stated and keep the confirmation.

Registering real estate and other valuable property

The simplest protection is to register property in the names of both partners as common ownership with defined shares.

A dispute over whether the couple lived together as a family and over the source of funds then does not arise at all, because the shares are already recorded in the register.