Current legislation is based on the principle of the best interests of the child and the need to ensure stable and adequate financial support.

Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of November 20, 1989, ratified by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine on February 27, 1991, provide that in all actions concerning children—whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities, or legislative bodies—the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. The child shall be provided with such protection and care as are necessary for his or her well-being, taking into account the rights and responsibilities of his or her parents, guardians, or other persons legally responsible for him or her.

At the same time, the practice of applying the provisions of the Family Code of Ukraine reveals certain gaps that hinder the achievement of this goal.

Article 190 of the Family Code of Ukraine establishes the possibility of terminating a child’s right to child support upon the child’s acquisition of ownership of real property.

By its legal nature, this mechanism is contractual in nature and requires the voluntary consent of both parents, notarization of the agreement, and mandatory approval by the guardianship and custody authority. This structure is designed to protect the child’s property rights and minimize the risk of abuse by parents. At the same time, this provision effectively limits the transfer of real estate in lieu of child support exclusively to the sphere of out-of-court settlement.

Draft Law No. 14336 of December 26, 2025, “On Amending Article 190 of the Family Code of Ukraine Regarding the Transfer of Real Estate in Lieu of Child Support” is intended to eliminate this gap by supplementing Article 190 of the Family Code of Ukraine with a new Part 8 as follows: “8. During the consideration of a case regarding the collection of child support, the child support payer may transfer real property in lieu of child support. When deciding on the transfer of real property in lieu of child support, the opinion of the guardianship and custody authority is mandatory.”

Thus, these amendments provide for the possibility of transferring real property in lieu of child support directly during the court proceedings regarding the collection of such support. This is intended to expand the court’s procedural options and provide it with tools for a more flexible and equitable resolution of child support matters.

Granting the court the authority to decide on the transfer of real property in lieu of child support potentially enhances the effectiveness of judicial protection of children’s rights and allows for consideration of the actual financial circumstances of the child support payer. This is particularly relevant in cases where child support obligations have not been fulfilled for an extended period, and the child support arrears continue to grow without actually providing for the child’s maintenance.

An important positive feature of the bill is the preservation of the role of the guardianship and custody authority as the entity responsible for ensuring the protection of the child’s rights and interests. The mandatory nature of its opinion precludes a purely formal approach to resolving the issue and is intended to ensure that the transfer of real property truly serves the child’s best interests, rather than merely serving as a means for the payer to terminate their child support obligations. In this context, the proposed provision is consistent with established judicial practice, according to which the opinions of guardianship and custody authorities are of significant importance in cases concerning the rights and interests of children.

At the same time, an analysis of the draft law reveals certain legal ambiguities. In particular, the proposed provision does not specify the procedural rules for the transfer of real property in lieu of child support through court proceedings, nor does it define criteria for ensuring that the value of such property is commensurate with the amount of child support obligations. The lack of clear guidelines may create risks of upsetting the balance of interests between the parties.

Nor can one ignore the potential risks of abuse of rights by the alimony payer. In court proceedings, a proposal to transfer real property could be used as a means of avoiding further financial obligations, even in cases where the transferred property does not meet the child’s actual needs or is encumbered by third-party rights. In this context, the active role of the court and the guardianship and custody authority in verifying the appropriateness and safety of such a transfer is of utmost importance.

The issue of the legal consequences of transferring real estate in lieu of child support through court proceedings deserves special attention. The draft law does not explicitly state whether all the restrictions and guarantees provided for in the current version of Article 190 of the Family Code of Ukraine apply to such legal relationships, in particular, the prohibition on enforcing claims against the transferred property and the special procedure for its alienation. The lack of clear regulation may negatively affect the level of protection of children’s rights and create legal uncertainty.

In summary, it should be noted that the draft law represents a step toward improving the legal regulation of child support relationships with regard to the transfer of real property in lieu of child support during court proceedings and toward closing gaps in current family law. Its adoption will potentially contribute to more effective protection of children’s rights and increase the efficiency of court proceedings in child support cases. At the same time, to achieve an adequate level of legal certainty and consistency in law enforcement practice, it is advisable to further clarify the content of the proposed provision and align it with other provisions of the Family Code of Ukraine.