Division of Marital Property:
during marriage and on divorce

The division of marital property does not happen automatically as a result of divorce. After the divorce, the property remains joint until the spouses divide it by concluding an agreement or until a court divides it (Art. 68 of the Family Code of Ukraine). It is therefore advisable to resolve the question of division at the same time as the divorce, by including the relevant claim in the same statement of claim, or by a separate claim if the marriage has already been dissolved.

The procedure for division depends on whether the spouses have reached agreement. If they have, the property is divided by concluding a division agreement, which a notary certifies in respect of real estate. If they have not, one spouse files a claim for division of joint property with the court, setting out the composition of the property, its value and the proposed division, and the court, having established the scope of the joint property and each spouse's share, distributes it between the parties. For clients living abroad, the entire procedure is handled by an attorney under an agreement on the provision of professional legal assistance and an attorney's warrant issued by the law firm, and participation in the hearing is ensured by videoconference if necessary (Art. 212 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine).

How marital property is divided

Before property is divided, it must be determined what exactly is subject to division. The Family Code distinguishes between two ownership regimes: the joint ownership of the spouses and the personal property of each of them. Only the former is divided, so in most cases the dispute over division begins with a dispute over which regime a particular item belongs to.

Joint ownership — everything acquired during the marriage

Property acquired by the spouses during the marriage belongs to the wife and the husband in joint ownership, even if one of them had no independent earnings for a valid reason, for example because they were studying, running the household or caring for children (Art. 60(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine). Every item acquired during the marriage, except items for individual use, is presumed to be joint (Art. 60(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine). This rule applies even where the apartment, car or bank deposit is registered in the name of one spouse: registration of the right in the name of one person does not mean that the property belongs to that person alone (Supreme Court ruling of 1 April 2020 in case No. 462/518/18).

The law establishes a presumption of joint ownership that can be rebutted. A spouse who claims that an item belongs to them alone must prove it by showing when and with what funds it was acquired, while the other spouse does not need to prove that the property is joint (Supreme Court ruling of 22 January 2020 in case No. 711/2302/18; ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 30 June 2020 in case No. 638/18231/15-ц). If there is no evidence of the personal origin of the funds, the property is divided equally. The time of acquisition is determined by the date of the contract or the registration of the right, not by the date of full payment, so an apartment whose loan is still being repaid is also joint.

Personal property — what is not divided

Personal property includes property acquired before the marriage; property acquired during the marriage under a deed of gift or by inheritance; property bought during the marriage with funds that belonged personally to one spouse; privatised housing and land plots; items for individual use, including jewellery; awards for personal merit; compensation for damage and insurance payments under life and health insurance contracts (Art. 57 of the Family Code of Ukraine). The court may also recognise as personal the property acquired while the spouses lived apart after the marriage had in fact broken down (Art. 57(6) of the Family Code of Ukraine). If both joint and personal funds were invested in a purchase, the share proportionate to the personal contribution is personal property (Art. 57(7) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Disputes most often arise over property bought with money from the sale of one spouse's personal property. For a long time the Supreme Court required that spouse to prove that exactly that money was spent on the new purchase and, in the absence of evidence, treated the acquisition as joint. In 2026 the Civil Cassation Court referred this issue to the Joint Chamber, proposing a different approach: the sale of personal property and the purchase of a new object on the same day indicate personal ownership if the other spouse did not give notarised consent to the purchase with joint funds, whereas if such consent was given, the acquisition is joint (Supreme Court order of 29 April 2026 in case No. 758/17900/21). Until the Joint Chamber issues its ruling, a full chain of evidence should be gathered in such disputes: the contract of sale of the personal property, bank documents on the movement of funds and the contract of purchase bearing the same date.

Personal property retains its status even when joint property is built on it. A house built by the spouses during the marriage on a land plot that one spouse bought with personal funds is joint property and is divided equally, while the land plot remains the personal property of its owner (Supreme Court ruling of 29 May 2025 in case No. 642/7544/21). Likewise, a reconstruction or extension of a joint object carried out by one spouse after the divorce does not terminate the other spouse's right to the part acquired during the marriage but only changes the size of the shares in the newly created object (Supreme Court ruling of 28 January 2026 in case No. 504/563/23).

Equal shares and methods of division

On division of property, the shares of the wife and the husband are equal unless otherwise determined by agreement between them or by a prenuptial agreement (Art. 70(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine). The court may depart from equal shares in circumstances of material significance, which are discussed in the section on children. Division is carried out in two steps: first each spouse's share is determined, and then the property is divided in kind in accordance with those shares (Art. 70, 71 of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Property is divided in kind: each spouse is allocated specific assets, taking their value into account, so that the total value allocated to each corresponds to their share. Indivisible items are awarded to one spouse, and items used for professional purposes to the spouse who used them in their professional activity, with their value taken into account when other property is allocated to the other spouse (Art. 71(2), (3) of the Family Code of Ukraine). Where there are several assets, the court considers dividing them so that no party has to pay compensation, or so that it is kept to a minimum (Supreme Court ruling of 3 December 2025 in case No. 522/5576/24). If compensation cannot be avoided, it is awarded instead of a share only with the consent of the spouse to whom the share belongs and provided that the corresponding amount has first been deposited to the court's deposit account (Art. 71(4), (5) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Division of property by agreement

Spouses have the right to divide their joint property by mutual consent, and such a division is the fastest and least costly way to settle property relations after a divorce. The law provides two instruments for this: a property division agreement, under which existing property is divided, and a prenuptial (marital) agreement, which makes it possible to determine the property regime for the future.

A property division agreement — when the spouses have reached agreement

The wife and the husband have the right to divide property held in joint ownership regardless of the dissolution of the marriage, that is, both during the marriage and after the divorce (Art. 69(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine). An agreement on the division of a house, apartment or other real estate, or on the allocation of real estate to one spouse out of the joint property, is made in writing and must be notarised (Art. 69(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine). An arrangement on the division of real estate made in simple written form has no legal effect, and in the event of a dispute the court does not take it into account (review of the case law of the Civil Cassation Court on the division of marital property). For movable property, money and corporate rights, notarisation is not mandatory, but in practice such agreements are also notarised to avoid a dispute over whether they were concluded.

The division agreement sets out which assets pass into the ownership of each spouse and, where necessary, provides for monetary compensation to the spouse who receives property of lower value. It is the basis for state registration of ownership of real estate in the name of the spouse to whom it is allocated and for re-registration of vehicles. The agreement cannot be used to shield property from enforcement of one spouse's debts: a division aimed at avoiding repayment of a debt or enforcement of a judgment is not protected by the court (ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 11 November 2019 in case No. 337/474/14-ц).

A prenuptial agreement — the possibility of setting the property regime for the future

A prenuptial agreement is concluded by persons who have applied to register their marriage or by spouses and is certified by a notary (Art. 92, 94 of the Family Code of Ukraine). By it, the spouses may agree that the joint ownership regime does not apply to property acquired during the marriage and treat it as shared ownership in defined shares or as the personal property of each, and may also determine how housing is to be used and how property may be divided in the event of divorce (Art. 97 of the Family Code of Ukraine). A prenuptial agreement may not reduce the rights of a child or place one spouse in an extremely disadvantageous financial position (Art. 93(4) of the Family Code of Ukraine).

It is difficult to challenge a prenuptial agreement after the divorce, because the unfairness of its terms is assessed as at the time of conclusion, not by the consequences that arose after the dissolution of the marriage (Supreme Court ruling of 10 May 2022 in case No. 755/5802/20). A claim that the agreement was concluded under pressure requires evidence of difficult circumstances and their link to the will of the other party; the need to obtain consent for a child's travel abroad does not in itself amount to such circumstances, especially since under martial law the other parent's consent to a child's travel is not required (Supreme Court ruling of 1 September 2026 in case No. 446/2948/24). An agreement on a regime of separate property concluded by spouses when registering their marriage in another state also applies to property bought in Ukraine, since the matrimonial property regime is universal and does not depend on where the assets are located (Supreme Court ruling of 28 January 2026 in case No. 554/4080/23).

A settlement agreement — the parties' right to agree on mutually beneficial terms while the case is pending

A settlement agreement is the parties' right to agree on the division on mutually beneficial terms while the case is already before the court. The spouses may conclude it at any stage of the proceedings, after which the court approves the agreement by an order and closes the proceedings (Art. 207 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). A settlement agreement has the same force as a court judgment and is enforced if it is not complied with. The court refuses to approve it if its terms are contrary to law or violate the rights of other persons, in particular where it includes property in which one spouse's new wife and their children live (Supreme Court ruling of 29 December 2025 in case No. 129/1702/25).

Court division of property

If the wife and the husband have not agreed on how to divide the property, the dispute is resolved by the court, which takes into account the interests of the wife, the husband, the children and other circumstances of material significance (Art. 71(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine). A claim for division is filed with the court at the respondent's registered place of residence and, if real estate is to be divided, at the location of the real estate (Art. 27, 30 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). The claim for division may be combined with the claim for divorce in one statement of claim, in which case the case is heard under the general claim procedure.

What to include in the claim

The statement of claim sets out the composition of the joint property, its value, the spouses' shares and the proposed division: which assets the claimant asks to be allocated to them, which to the respondent, and whether either of them is owed compensation. The value of the claim is determined by the value of the property and, where several claims are made, by their total (Art. 176 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). The claim is accompanied by title documents, documents on the value of the property and evidence that the property was acquired during the marriage.

The wording of the claims affects the outcome. A claim to recognise property as joint does not provide independent protection: the scope of joint property is a matter of proof that the court resolves in the reasoning of its judgment, and the effective remedy is precisely the claim for division (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 23 January 2024 in case No. 523/14489/15-ц; Supreme Court ruling of 9 April 2025 in case No. 759/18856/19). The claim should cover all joint property, including indivisible items, as the court's resolution of the dispute should not require a new application to the court concerning the same property (Supreme Court ruling of 3 December 2025 in case No. 522/5576/24). At the same time, the court is not bound by the proposed division and may distribute the property differently from what the claimant asked, taking into account the interests of the parties; this does not go beyond the scope of the claims (Supreme Court ruling of 4 February 2026 in case No. 489/2488/22).

Interim measures — to prevent the disposal of disputed property during the proceedings

A case on the division of property takes months, and during that time the other spouse may sell a car or withdraw money from an account. The sale of joint property after the claim has been filed does not deprive the claimant of the right to division: property transferred to third parties is included in what is divided, and the court decides on compensation or on allocating another asset against the share, since the consequences of one party's bad faith cannot be imposed on the other (Supreme Court ruling of 4 February 2026 in case No. 489/2488/22). However, it is easier to be awarded compensation than to receive it, so in order to prevent the disputed property from being disposed of during the court proceedings, a party may apply for interim measures by filing the relevant application together with the claim.

The court may attach the disputed property or the funds in the respondent's accounts within half of the amount claimed (Art. 149, 150 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). It is not necessary to prove that the respondent is already concealing or disposing of property: interim measures are preventive, and a lengthy dispute between the spouses is in itself a sufficient ground to conclude that enforcement of the future judgment may be hindered; a negative balance on an account does not prevent attachment (Supreme Court ruling of 7 August 2026 in case No. 363/1304/23).

Compensation instead of a share — when property cannot be divided

A car, a garage or a one-room apartment cannot be divided in kind, so such items are awarded to one spouse with compensation to the other for half of their value. Compensation instead of a share in a house, apartment or land plot is awarded only with the consent of the spouse to whom the share belongs and provided that the other spouse has first deposited the corresponding amount to the court's deposit account (Art. 71(4), (5) of the Family Code of Ukraine). Without such consent, the right to a share may be terminated on the claim of the other co-owner if the share is insignificant and cannot be allocated in kind, the item is indivisible, joint possession and use of it is impossible, and termination will not cause substantial harm to the interests of the co-owner and members of their family (Art. 365 of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

Where the only housing is concerned, the court also examines the financial position of the spouse to whom the share is transferred and their ability to pay the compensation, since otherwise enforcement would be levied against the very apartment in which they have just been given the share (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 10 December 2025 in case No. 466/2128/23; Supreme Court ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 509/4496/23). If neither spouse has made a deposit and neither asks for the other's right to be terminated, the court determines notional shares in the indivisible property without actually dividing it and leaves it in shared ownership.

Property abroad

Disputes over ownership of real estate are heard by the courts of the state in which it is located (Art. 77 of the Law of Ukraine «On Private International Law»). A Ukrainian court therefore does not hear a claim for recognition of ownership of an apartment in Spain or Bulgaria as part of the division of marital property and closes the proceedings in that part (Supreme Court ruling of 9 March 2026 in case No. 761/17032/25). By contrast, a claim to recover from the other spouse monetary compensation for half of the value of such property falls within the jurisdiction of a Ukrainian court, since it does not change the owner's title and does not require changes to the registers of the foreign state (Supreme Court ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 334/6412/23). For clients who own property abroad, this determines how the claim is drafted: not division in kind, but compensation.

Division of property in a civil (unregistered) marriage

A woman and a man who live together as a family but are not married to each other or to anyone else acquire property while living together in joint ownership, unless otherwise provided by a written agreement between them, and the same rules of division apply to such property as to the property of spouses (Art. 74 of the Family Code of Ukraine). The difference from a registered marriage lies not in the rules of division but in the evidence: first, the very fact of living together as a family must be proven.

What must be proven and how

A family consists of persons who live together, are connected by a common household and have mutual rights and obligations (Art. 3 of the Family Code of Ukraine). In resolving the dispute, the court must establish all three elements: the fact of living together, a common household and mutual rights and obligations (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 3 July 2019 in case No. 554/8023/15-ц). The evidence includes witness testimony, documents on registration or actual residence at the same address, shared expenses on housing, holidays and everyday life, common children, correspondence and photographs from the period when the disputed property was acquired. It must be proven that the relationship existed at the time of the acquisition: property bought before the partners began living together or after they separated is not joint.

There is no need to bring a separate claim to establish the fact of living together as a family in a claim for division: this fact is a ground of the claim and is established by the court within the same case, and a claim to establish a fact does not provide effective protection (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 10 April 2024 in case No. 760/20948/16-ц; Supreme Court ruling of 17 October 2025 in case No. 638/1651/22). If no division of property is yet planned, the fact may be established in separate non-contentious proceedings, but such a ruling does not in itself divide any property.

How protection differs in a civil marriage

Until the court has established the fact of the family relationship, the partner in whose name the property is registered is its sole owner in the eyes of third parties. This makes it more difficult to challenge transactions concluded by that partner without the other's knowledge: a share in a company sold during the de facto relationship could not be challenged eighteen years later, because the claimant had to prove not only that she did not know of the sale but also that she could not have learned of it (ruling of the Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 17 February 2026 in case No. 918/173/25). Claims for division of property acquired in a de facto marriage are subject to the general three-year limitation period (Art. 257 of the Civil Code of Ukraine). For these reasons, in a civil marriage it is advisable to register valuable property in the names of both partners or to conclude a written agreement on the regime of their joint property.

Whether a cohabitant, after the death of a partner in whose name a share in a company was registered, may claim from the heirs recognition of the right to half of that share, rather than only monetary compensation, is currently pending before the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court (order of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 22 July 2026 in case No. 297/1252/24). This section will be updated once the ruling is adopted.

Valuation of property for division

The value of property is needed for two purposes: to determine the value of the claim and to calculate compensation if the property cannot be divided equally in kind. The amount of compensation depends on the date as at which and the way in which the value is determined, so the parties often dispute exactly this.

The date as at which value is determined

The value of property to be divided is determined by agreement between the spouses and, failing agreement, on the basis of its actual value at the time the case is heard (ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 3 October 2018 in case No. 127/7029/15-ц). The price stated in the contract of sale at the time of acquisition is irrelevant for division, as is a valuation report as at the date when one spouse sold the property (Supreme Court ruling of 16 July 2025 in case No. 442/6545/22). If the property was disposed of by one spouse against the will of the other and its actual value cannot be established, the market value of similar property at the time of the hearing is determined; a sale at an understated price without the other spouse's consent is a manifestation of bad faith and does not give the right to pay compensation in the amount determined by such a contract (Supreme Court ruling of 12 February 2025 in case No. 761/29288/22).

How value is confirmed

To confirm the value of real estate, a report of a licensed valuer or the conclusion of a forensic construction and valuation examination is submitted; for vehicles, the conclusion of a forensic vehicle examination; and for a share in authorised capital, a valuation of the market value of all participants' shares combined. If the parties submit different valuations, the court orders a forensic examination. Evidence of value is submitted before the preparatory hearing is closed, and the court takes into account an expert conclusion added to the file before that point (Supreme Court ruling of 12 February 2025 in case No. 761/29288/22). If the value of the claim stated by the claimant clearly does not correspond to the actual value of the property, the court itself provisionally determines the court fee and, once the value is established, recovers any shortfall or refunds any overpayment (Art. 176(2) of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine).

Division of a business and corporate rights on divorce

One spouse's business may take the form of a limited liability company, a private enterprise or the activity of a sole proprietor, and the rules of division differ for each of these forms. What they have in common is that the property of a legal entity does not belong to the spouses, and only what belongs to the participant is subject to division.

A share in a limited liability company

If one spouse contributed joint funds to the authorised capital of a company, the company becomes their owner, and the spouse who made the contribution acquires the right to a participant's share. The other spouse does not become a participant and does not receive the share itself: they acquire the right to claim payment of half of the value of the share (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 10 April 2024 in case No. 760/20948/16-ц). A claim to recognise ownership of half of the share is dismissed as an improper remedy, so the claim should be for recovery of compensation (Supreme Court ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 759/8676/19).

Compensation is calculated on the value of the share as at the date the claim is filed, not on the amount of the original contribution, since the value of the share may rise or fall over the company's lifetime (Supreme Court ruling of 19 February 2025 in case No. 369/5830/22). At the same time, there is a presumption that the value of the share equals the contribution until the party asserting a change proves otherwise. The spouse claiming compensation therefore has an interest in ordering a valuation of the share; otherwise the court will award half of the contribution. If the share was sold without the other spouse's consent, compensation is determined on its actual value at the time of sale, taking into account obligations related to that share (Supreme Court ruling of 9 April 2025 in case No. 569/7279/18).

A private enterprise and a sole proprietor's assets

For a private enterprise, the authorised capital may be the object of the spouses' joint ownership and may be divided by allocating a share to one spouse, while the property of the enterprise itself belongs to it as a legal entity and is not divided (decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of 19 September 2012 No. 17-рп/2012; ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 29 June 2021 in case No. 916/2813/18; Supreme Court ruling of 2 April 2025 in case No. 606/2201/23).

The property of a sole proprietor used in their business is the joint property of the spouses, like any other property acquired during the marriage with joint funds (Supreme Court ruling of 19 February 2020 in case No. 279/6459/14-ц). In dividing it, the court takes into account for which spouse the asset is more important and whether the division would interfere with the business, so non-residential premises from which the entrepreneur earns income are usually awarded to them as items used for professional purposes, while the other spouse is allocated other property with compensation for the difference in value (Art. 71(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine; Supreme Court ruling of 4 September 2026 in case No. 932/7437/23).

Dividends

Income from property belonging to one spouse, including dividends, is the property of that spouse (Art. 58 of the Family Code of Ukraine). Therefore, dividends from a share acquired before the marriage remain the personal property of the participant even if they are paid during the marriage (Supreme Court ruling of 13 May 2026 in case No. 277/1353/24). Dividends may be recognised as joint only by a court judgment if the other spouse, by their labour or funds, took part in maintaining that property, managing it or taking care of it (Art. 62(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine). Dividends from a share acquired during the marriage with joint funds are joint.

Division of the spouses' debts and loans

Together with property, spouses also acquire debts, so division takes into account not only assets but also obligations that arose in the interests of the family (Supreme Court ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 334/6412/23). However, not every debt of one spouse is joint, and a joint debt cannot be split between the spouses without the creditor's consent.

Which debts are joint

A contract concluded by one spouse in the interests of the family creates obligations for the other spouse if the property received under the contract was used in the interests of the family (Art. 65(4) of the Family Code of Ukraine). The spouses are jointly and severally liable for such an obligation (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 30 June 2020 in case No. 638/18231/15-ц). Being married at the time one spouse took out a loan does not in itself make the other spouse a joint debtor: it must be proven that the money was used for the family's needs, for example to buy housing, for renovation or for medical treatment (Supreme Court ruling of 17 October 2025 in case No. 638/1651/22). If the loan was spent on personal needs, it remains the personal debt of the spouse who took it out.

A joint debt that both spouses acknowledge does not need to be separately recognised as joint or taken into account in the division, as the spouses are already jointly and severally liable for it; such a debt matters only where one spouse has already repaid it and claims half from the other (Supreme Court ruling of 17 October 2025 in case No. 638/1651/22).

A loan and a mortgage after the divorce

The loan agreement is not re-executed when property is divided. The court cannot vest one spouse with the rights and obligations of the borrower under the loan agreement and of the mortgagor under the mortgage agreement as part of the division without the bank's consent, since this would amount to a substitution of the debtor, which is permitted only with the creditor's consent (Art. 520 of the Civil Code of Ukraine; Supreme Court ruling of 6 August 2025 in case No. 645/989/22). Article 65(4) of the Family Code of Ukraine governs only the division between the spouses of debt obligations already performed, not the substitution of a party to a contract. The court therefore divides the apartment bought with the loan between the spouses and leaves the loan with the spouse who took it out; the spouse allocated a share in the mortgaged apartment becomes a mortgagor by operation of law (Art. 23 of the Law of Ukraine «On Mortgage»).

In dividing the property, the court establishes what part of the loan was repaid during the marriage, what part after its dissolution and what balance of the debt remains, and divides the property taking the joint debt into account (Supreme Court ruling of 8 July 2020 in case No. 754/11103/16-ц). A loan taken by one spouse before the marriage and repaid during the marriage does not change the property regime: an apartment bought with a loan before the marriage was registered remains personal property, and the other spouse is entitled only to compensation of half of the joint funds spent on repaying it (Supreme Court ruling of 3 July 2019 in case No. 554/14662/15-ц).

Recovering half of the amount paid — recourse

A spouse who repays a joint loan on their own after the divorce is entitled to recover half of the amount paid from the other as from a joint and several debtor (Supreme Court ruling of 13 February 2020 in case No. 320/3072/18). The condition is payment from personal funds: if the loan was repaid during the marriage with the spouses' joint funds, there are no grounds for recourse (Supreme Court ruling of 25 February 2025 in case No. 522/14458/21). Such claims are brought as a separate claim or as a counterclaim in the division case and are also subject to a three-year limitation period running from the date of each payment.

Division of unfinished construction

A house built during the marriage but not put into operation is one of the most difficult objects to divide, as ownership of it has not been registered. Until construction is completed, a person is considered the owner of the materials, equipment and the like used in the construction, and a contract concerning an unfinished construction object may be concluded only after state registration of the right to it (Art. 331 of the Civil Code of Ukraine). For this reason, for a long time the other spouse was offered only a right to the building materials, and it was this approach that the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court changed in 2026.

A house not put into operation — recognition of the right to a share

An unfinished construction object is a thing of a special kind in respect of which civil rights and obligations may exist. If such an object shows no signs of unauthorised construction but is not put into operation through the fault of the spouse who is the formal developer, the court recognises the other spouse's right to a share in the unfinished construction object, removing the uncertainty in the legal status of the building (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 8 April 2026 in case No. 607/10858/22). The degree of completion of the object is irrelevant: the right to a share is recognised even in respect of a house that is in fact finished but has not been accepted into operation.

Such a judgment does not replace the procedure for putting the house into operation and does not release the co-owners from the obligation to complete it, but it confirms the regime of joint ownership, is the basis for state registration of the right to the unfinished construction object itself and, after the house is put into operation, of the right to the house. The claim should be for recognition of the right to a share in the unfinished construction object: a claim to recognise such a house as joint property is not granted separately, as it is an ineffective remedy.

Unauthorised construction

Different rules apply if the object includes structures built without authorisation, that is, on a land plot not allocated for that purpose, without a document granting the right to carry out construction work, without an approved design or with material breaches of building regulations (Art. 376 of the Civil Code of Ukraine). Ownership of unauthorised construction is acquired only in the manner established by that article, so the right to a share in such an object is not recognised in the course of division, and the court may recognise the parties' right to the building materials and structural elements or leave the object to one spouse and award compensation to the other (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 12 April 2023 in case No. 511/2303/19, as interpreted in the ruling of 8 April 2026 in case No. 607/10858/22).

An apartment in a new building

If an apartment was bought from a developer under a preliminary contract, property rights to it do not arise until the act of acceptance and transfer of property rights is signed, since a preliminary contract only obliges the parties to conclude the main contract in the future (Art. 635 of the Civil Code of Ukraine). A claim to recognise the right to half of the property rights to such an apartment is therefore dismissed (Supreme Court ruling of 22 January 2025 in case No. 753/7776/22). What is divided is the money paid to the developer during the marriage, half of which the other spouse is entitled to recover as compensation, and, after the main contract is concluded and ownership is registered, the apartment itself. If the property rights were transferred under a contract of sale of property rights or an investment contract with a signed act, they are joint property and are divided like other property.

Challenging transactions disposing of joint property made by one spouse

The wife and the husband dispose of joint property by mutual consent, and when one spouse concludes a contract, they are presumed to act with the consent of the other (Art. 65(1), (2) of the Family Code of Ukraine). For contracts that require notarisation or state registration, and for contracts concerning valuable property, the other spouse's consent must be given in writing, and for notarised contracts it must be notarised (Art. 65(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine). If property is sold without such consent, the other spouse has two options: to seek a declaration that the contract is invalid or to claim compensation of half of the value of what was sold.

When a contract is declared invalid

A transaction disposing of joint property concluded by one of the co-owners may be declared invalid on the claim of another co-owner if the co-owner who concluded it lacked the necessary authority (Art. 369(4) of the Civil Code of Ukraine). However, the absence of consent does not in itself invalidate the contract: the presumption of consent operates in favour of a bona fide acquirer, and the contract is declared invalid only if the acquirer knew or could not have failed to know that the property was joint and that the other spouse had not consented (rulings of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 29 June 2021 in case No. 916/2813/18 and of 23 January 2024 in case No. 523/14489/15-ц; Supreme Court ruling of 13 March 2025 in case No. 753/25154/21). The acquirer's good faith is presumed, so the burden of proving their knowledge lies with the party challenging the contract.

Bad faith is indicated by a sale to a relative, a sale at a price many times lower than the market price, or the buyer's awareness of the seller's marital status. A contract for the sale of a car concluded by the wife with the parties' daughter at a price of less than one per cent of its market value was declared invalid, and the car was returned to joint ownership with the cancellation of its registration in the buyer's name (Supreme Court ruling of 29 January 2025 in case No. 317/2624/21). A deed of gift of joint property made without the other spouse's consent is invalid in its entirety, regardless of the good faith of the donee (ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 15 June 2020 in case No. 430/1281/14-ц). A court judgment ordering the return of property is the basis for cancelling the registration of the acquirer's right and registering it in the owner's name (Art. 27 of the Law of Ukraine «On State Registration of Real Property Rights and Their Encumbrances»).

Compensation instead of invalidation

If the acquirer acted in good faith or challenging the contract is not advisable, the other spouse claims compensation of half of the value from the spouse who sold the property. If it is established in the division that one spouse disposed of joint property against the will of the other and not in the interests of the family, or concealed it, that property or its value is taken into account in the division (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 8 April 2026 in case No. 607/10858/22). Compensation is calculated at the market value of similar property at the time of the hearing, not at the contract price (Supreme Court rulings of 12 February 2025 in case No. 761/29288/22 and of 16 July 2025 in case No. 442/6545/22).

In such a dispute, what matters above all is what the proceeds were spent on: if they were used for the needs of the family, no compensation is awarded even in the absence of written consent to the sale. The burden of proving that the money was used in the interests of the family lies with the spouse who sold the property (Supreme Court ruling of 16 July 2025 in case No. 442/6545/22). If the property was sold during the marriage and the other spouse did not object to the sale or bring any claims for a long time, the court proceeds on the basis that the sale took place with consent and that the proceeds were used for the family (ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 8 April 2026 in case No. 607/10858/22). Only one remedy may be chosen: once compensation for a car sold without consent has been recovered, the same contract can no longer be challenged as fraudulent (Supreme Court ruling of 26 November 2025 in case No. 736/1509/24).

Property sold to pay the debts of one spouse

Enforcement of the obligations of one spouse may be levied only against that spouse's personal property and against their share in the joint property allocated to them in kind (Art. 73(1) of the Family Code of Ukraine). The sale at an electronic auction of an entire apartment acquired during the marriage to pay one spouse's personal debt therefore violates the other spouse's right, and such an auction is declared invalid on that spouse's claim (Supreme Court ruling of 21 May 2025 in case No. 711/744/23). In that case, claims to invalidate the auction report and the certificate of purchase at a public auction are not brought, as these documents do not in themselves create rights; what is challenged is the sale transaction at the auction itself. If an apartment has been re-registered in another person's name without the owner's will, it is recovered even from a bona fide acquirer, who is entitled to claim damages from their seller (Art. 387, 388, 661 of the Civil Code of Ukraine; Supreme Court ruling of 4 March 2026 in case No. 947/12009/23).

Limitation period in property division cases

The limitation period does not apply to claims for division of property if the marriage between the spouses has not been dissolved. A claim for division brought after the divorce is subject to a three-year limitation period, which is calculated from the day one of the co-owners learned or could have learned that their ownership right had been violated (Art. 72 of the Family Code of Ukraine; Art. 261(1) of the Civil Code of Ukraine).

From which day the three years run

The period begins not on the date of the divorce but on the day the right was violated, provided the person learned or could have learned of it (Supreme Court ruling of 7 September 2023 in case No. 947/35719/21). A violation is a specific act of the other spouse: the sale or gift of the property, a refusal to allow the use of an apartment, re-registration of the right in another person's name, a sale at auction. The mere registration of property in the name of the former husband or wife, while they do not deny the other's right, does not start the limitation period, so a claim filed ten or thirty years after the divorce is not time-barred on that ground alone. In a case concerning an apartment sold at auction to pay the former husband's debt, the limitation period was calculated from the date of the auction in 2023, even though the marriage had been dissolved in 1994 and the apartment had been attached in 2009 (Supreme Court ruling of 21 May 2025 in case No. 711/744/23).

Periods falling within the quarantine from 12 March 2020 to 30 June 2023 were extended for the duration of the quarantine (paragraph 12 of the Final and Transitional Provisions of the Civil Code of Ukraine; Supreme Court ruling of 4 March 2026 in case No. 947/12009/23). The court applies the expiry of the limitation period only on the application of a party to the dispute (Art. 267(3), (4) of the Civil Code of Ukraine), so if the respondent has not raised it, the court hears the case on the merits.

When the limitation period does expire

The law proceeds from the presumption that a person is obliged to know the state of their property rights, so to have the period restored it is not enough to prove that the claimant did not know of the violation: they must prove that they could not have learned of it (ruling of the Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 17 February 2026 in case No. 918/173/25). If the former spouse openly used the property as their own, sold it under a notarised contract, or the property was re-registered in a public register many years ago, the court may conclude that the claimant could have learned of the violation earlier. For property acquired in a de facto marriage, the general three-year limitation period applies (Art. 257 of the Civil Code of Ukraine) with the same rule on when the period begins.

Do children affect the shares in the division of property?

The fact that children live with one of the spouses does not in itself change the size of the shares and is not a ground for giving that spouse a larger part of the property (Supreme Court ruling of 27 December 2019 in case No. 297/2837/17). The law provides two exceptions to equal shares: the share of the spouse with whom the children live may be increased, and the share of the spouse who evaded family obligations may be reduced (Art. 70(2), (3) of the Family Code of Ukraine). The court applies both exceptions only at the request of a party and on the basis of evidence.

Increasing the share of the spouse with whom the children live

The share of the wife or the husband may be increased if the children, or adult children unable to work, live with them, provided that the amount of child support they receive is insufficient for their physical and spiritual development and medical treatment (Art. 70(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine). This rule is applied according to a clear sequence: child support has been awarded by agreement or by a court judgment, it is being paid, but the amount is insufficient for the child's needs, and this has been proven; for a child with special needs, it must be shown what expenses arise, what they relate to and whether the child support paid covers them (ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 24 February 2025 in case No. 206/4992/21). If no child support is being recovered at all, Art. 70(3) of the Family Code of Ukraine does not apply, and the issue is resolved by reducing the other spouse's share.

Child support arrears repaid before the hearing and the child reaching the age of majority do not give grounds for increasing the share unless it is proven that the adult child is being supported (Supreme Court ruling of 8 April 2026 in case No. 215/5316/20). A request to increase the share must be made separately: the court does not depart from equal shares on its own initiative, and the need for additional expenses on the children does not in itself justify allocating to the spouse with whom they live commercial assets used by the other spouse (Supreme Court ruling of 4 September 2026 in case No. 932/7437/23).

Reducing the share of a spouse who evaded child support

The court may depart from equal shares in circumstances of material significance, in particular if one spouse did not provide for the family, evaded supporting a child, concealed, destroyed or damaged joint property or spent it to the detriment of the family (Art. 70(2) of the Family Code of Ukraine). Evasion of child support is not linked either to the existence of a court judgment on child support or to the amount of arrears: it occurs where an agreement on child support is not performed, where a court judgment or court order is not complied with, and where the parent living separately provides no support at all in the absence of an agreement or judgment (ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 24 February 2025 in case No. 206/4992/21). Bad faith is also indicated by concealing items, handing them over to relatives for safekeeping or selling joint property without the other spouse's consent.

In such circumstances the court reduces the share of one spouse and correspondingly increases the share of the other, for example to one third and two thirds of the ownership of an apartment, and must state in the judgment which circumstances were the basis for departing from equality. The burden of proving these circumstances lies with the spouse asking for the shares to be changed (Supreme Court ruling of 5 December 2018 in case No. 456/828/17). Property bought for a child and money deposited in the child's name do not belong to the spouses' joint property and are not divided between the parents (Art. 173, 174 of the Family Code of Ukraine).

Recent Supreme Court case law on the division of marital property

In 2025–2026 the Supreme Court adopted a number of rulings that clarify the rules of division in the most contentious situations. The positions referred to in this article are collected below, grouped by issue, so that they can be quickly found and checked in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions.

Objects of division and the property regime

Ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 8 April 2026 in case No. 607/10858/22 — an unfinished construction object without signs of unauthorised construction is a thing of a special kind; the court recognises the right to a share in it regardless of the degree of completion, and the judgment is the basis for registration of the right. Supreme Court ruling of 28 January 2026 in case No. 504/563/23 — reconstruction of a joint object after the divorce does not terminate joint ownership but changes the shares. Ruling of 29 May 2025 in case No. 642/7544/21 — a house built during the marriage on a personal plot is joint, the plot is not. Ruling of 22 January 2025 in case No. 753/7776/22 — property rights under a preliminary contract with a developer are not divided; what is divided is the money paid. Order of 29 April 2026 in case No. 758/17900/21 — the issue of property bought on the day personal property was sold has been referred to the Joint Chamber.

Business and dividends

Ruling of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 10 April 2024 in case No. 760/20948/16-ц — the other spouse is entitled to half of the value of an LLC share, not to the share itself. Ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 759/8676/19 — a claim to recognise the right to part of a share is an improper remedy. Ruling of 19 February 2025 in case No. 369/5830/22 — compensation is calculated on the value of the share at the date of the claim, not on the contribution. Ruling of 9 April 2025 in case No. 569/7279/18 — where a share is sold without consent, compensation is determined on its actual value. Ruling of 2 April 2025 in case No. 606/2201/23 — the authorised capital of a private enterprise may be divided. Ruling of 4 September 2026 in case No. 932/7437/23 — a sole proprietor's assets are joint, but commercial assets are awarded to the entrepreneur with compensation. Ruling of 13 May 2026 in case No. 277/1353/24 — dividends from a pre-marital share are personal property. Order of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court of 22 July 2026 in case No. 297/1252/24 — the issue of recognising the right to half of a share after a partner's death has been accepted for consideration.

Debts, loans, mortgages

Ruling of 6 August 2025 in case No. 645/989/22 — obligations under a loan and mortgage cannot be split between the spouses without the bank's consent. Ruling of 17 October 2025 in case No. 638/1651/22 — marriage in itself does not make one spouse's loan joint; a debt acknowledged by both as joint is not taken into account in the division. Ruling of 25 February 2025 in case No. 522/14458/21 — recourse is possible only where the debt was repaid from personal funds. Ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 334/6412/23 — debts are taken into account in the division, and compensation for property abroad is recovered in Ukraine.

Transactions without the other spouse's consent and compensation

Ruling of 29 January 2025 in case No. 317/2624/21 — the sale of a car to a daughter at a nominal price is in bad faith, and the contract is invalid. Ruling of 13 March 2025 in case No. 753/25154/21 — a contract is invalid only if the acquirer acted in bad faith; good faith is presumed. Ruling of the Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 17 February 2026 in case No. 918/173/25 — the same applies to the sale of an LLC share; «did not know» is not enough to restore the limitation period. Ruling of 12 February 2025 in case No. 761/29288/22 — compensation at market value at the time of the hearing; a sale at an understated price is in bad faith. Ruling of 16 July 2025 in case No. 442/6545/22 — the spouse who sold the property must prove that the proceeds were used for the family. Ruling of 26 November 2025 in case No. 736/1509/24 — once compensation has been recovered, the contract cannot be challenged. Ruling of 4 February 2026 in case No. 489/2488/22 — the sale of property during the dispute does not deprive the claimant of the right to division. Ruling of 7 August 2026 in case No. 363/1304/23 — attachment of funds as an interim measure without evidence of bad faith.

Agreements, children, limitation, foreign element

Ruling of 1 September 2026 in case No. 446/2948/24 — a prenuptial agreement allegedly signed under pressure was not set aside. Ruling of 28 January 2026 in case No. 554/4080/23 — a foreign regime of separate property applies to real estate in Ukraine. Ruling of 29 December 2025 in case No. 129/1702/25 — a settlement agreement affecting third parties is not approved. Ruling of the Joint Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court of the Supreme Court of 24 February 2025 in case No. 206/4992/21 — the sequence for applying Art. 70(2) and (3) of the Family Code of Ukraine, shares of one third and two thirds. Ruling of 8 April 2026 in case No. 215/5316/20 — repaid child support arrears and the child reaching majority do not justify departing from equality. Ruling of 21 May 2025 in case No. 711/744/23 — an auction for one spouse's personal debt is invalid, and the limitation period runs from the date of the auction. Ruling of 4 March 2026 in case No. 947/12009/23 — recovery of an apartment from the acquirer; the quarantine extended the limitation period. Ruling of 9 March 2026 in case No. 761/17032/25 — division of real estate abroad is outside the jurisdiction of Ukrainian courts. Ruling of 3 December 2025 in case No. 522/5576/24 and ruling of 6 May 2026 in case No. 509/4496/23 — the claim must cover all property; compensation for the only housing depends on the ability to pay.

How Disputes Law Firm can help

The outcome of a property division case depends on how fully the composition of the property has been established, whether the claims have been correctly formulated and whether measures have been taken to prevent the property from being disposed of before the judgment. A mistake at any of these stages does not deprive the client of the right to division, but leads to refusal of part of the claims, to understated compensation or to the need for a new claim. The work of the law firm is organised so that the client obtains an enforceable judgment without having to take part in the proceedings in person.

Analysis of the situation and strategy

The work begins with an analysis of the client's documents: when and in whose name the property was registered, with what funds it was acquired, whether there is a prenuptial agreement, loans, shares in companies or property abroad. On this basis it is determined which property is joint, which claims should be brought, in which court, whether interim measures are needed and what value of the property can be expected from a valuation. An opinion on the prospects of the case, the approximate timeframe and the scope of work is provided before the agreement is signed.

Identifying marital assets — attorney's requests, obtaining evidence, registers

Only property whose existence is known can be divided, so work on the claim begins with establishing the full composition of the joint property. The client usually knows about the apartment and the car, but does not always know about a second car registered to the other spouse a month before the divorce, a share in a company, a deposit, a land plot in another region or property sold during the marriage without their consent. To identify such property, the attorney uses three tools: access to public registers, attorney's requests and obtaining evidence by a court order.

Part of the information is obtained by the attorney from the registers independently, without the court. In the State Register of Real Property Rights, an information certificate is obtained on the basis of the other spouse's full name and taxpayer identification number on all objects registered to them after 2013, with the dates and grounds of acquisition, encumbrances and mortgages (Art. 32 of the Law of Ukraine «On State Registration of Real Property Rights and Their Encumbrances»); it is the date of acquisition that shows whether the object was acquired during the marriage. The Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Associations provides information on participation in companies, the size of shares, the dates of their acquisition and registration as a sole proprietor (Art. 11 of the Law of Ukraine «On State Registration of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs and Public Associations»). The public cadastral map and the State Land Cadastre provide data on land plots, the State Register of Encumbrances of Movable Property on pledged cars and equipment, the Unified Register of Debtors on open enforcement proceedings, and the Unified State Register of Court Decisions on other disputes in which the other spouse acknowledged or contested a right to property.

Information that is not disclosed by owner in the registers is obtained by the attorney through an attorney's request. An attorney has the right to request from state authorities, local self-government bodies, enterprises, institutions and organisations information and copies of documents necessary to provide legal assistance to the client, and the recipient must respond within five working days, which may be extended to twenty if the request concerns a large volume of information (Art. 24 of the Law of Ukraine «On the Bar and Practice of Law»). For an unlawful refusal or late response, the official is subject to administrative liability (Art. 212-3 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences). In this way the attorney obtains information from the Unified State Register of Vehicles on all cars registered to the other spouse during the marriage, including those sold, with the dates of re-registration and details of the new owners; information from the Unified Register of Weapons on hunting and other weapons; information from local authorities on land plots allocated and building permits; information from companies on the share in the authorised capital, its book value and dividends paid; information from notaries on certified contracts of sale; and information from the ship and civil aviation registers on boats, yachts and aircraft.

Information protected by law as banking, tax or personal data is not provided in response to an attorney's request, and to obtain it the attorney applies to the court with a motion to obtain evidence. The motion specifies what evidence is sought, who holds it, what circumstances it may confirm and why the claimant cannot obtain it independently (Art. 84 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). On the basis of a court order, banks provide information on accounts, their balances and transactions during the marriage, which would otherwise be banking secrecy (Art. 62 of the Law of Ukraine «On Banks and Banking»); the tax authorities provide information on all accounts of the other spouse opened in all banks, declared income and dividends received; depositary institutions and the National Depository of Ukraine provide information on securities held; the Pension Fund provides information on income on which contributions were paid; and trading platforms and exchanges provide information on virtual assets. A court order to obtain evidence is binding, and for non-compliance the court imposes a fine (Art. 148 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine). Evidence may be obtained even before the claim is filed if there is a risk that it will be destroyed or concealed, and at any stage of the proceedings.

The information obtained forms the composition of the property for the claim and provides grounds for other claims: if the vehicle register shows that a car was sold during the marriage without the client's consent, a claim is made for compensation of half of its value; if bank statements show that money was withdrawn from a deposit on the eve of the divorce, it is included in the property to be divided as having been spent not in the interests of the family. The same information serves as the basis for an application for interim measures, since the court is shown specific accounts and objects to be attached.

Division by agreement

If the spouses are prepared to reach agreement, the attorney prepares a draft property division agreement or prenuptial agreement, agrees its terms with the other party and arranges notarisation and state registration of rights. If an agreement is reached while the case is pending, a settlement agreement is prepared for approval by the court.

Preparing the claim, evidence and valuation

The statement of claim is prepared in accordance with Art. 175, 176 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine with the full composition of the property and a substantiated proposal for division. Missing documents are obtained through attorney's requests: extracts from the State Register of Real Property Rights, information on vehicles, data on shares in companies, bank statements. A valuation of the property is ordered or a motion for a forensic examination is filed, and an application for interim measures is filed together with the claim. The claim is filed electronically in the «Electronic Court» system.

Representation in court without the client's personal presence

The attorney takes part in hearings under an agreement on the provision of professional legal assistance and an attorney's warrant, files applications and motions, opposes attempts by the other party to exclude property from the joint property or to understate its value, and, if property is disposed of during the dispute, brings a claim for compensation. If the client wishes, they join the hearing by videoconference from their own device (Art. 212 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine), and they are informed by the attorney of every procedural step. If the judgment is appealed, representation continues in the court of appeal.

Enforcement of the judgment

Once the judgment has entered into force, the attorney obtains a copy of it and submits documents for state registration of ownership of the property allocated to the client, and if compensation has been awarded, submits the writ of execution to a private or state enforcement officer. If compensation has been awarded against the client, the attorney arranges for the funds to be deposited to the court's deposit account or handed over under an act.

Working with clients abroad

Clients living outside Ukraine send documents electronically and sign the agreement remotely, and their participation in hearings is ensured by the attorney or by videoconference. For property abroad, it is determined which claims can be brought in a Ukrainian court and which require an application to the court of the state where the property is located. The court judgment is apostilled and translated, where necessary, for use in the client's country of residence.