Grandmother of deceased serviceman proved right to pension and one-time payment from Ministry of Defense — Supreme Court decision

The issue of establishing the fact of being dependent on a deceased serviceman acquires special significance during martial law, as it determines the family members' right to social guarantees, including a one-time financial aid and pension due to the loss of a breadwinner.

This exact issue was considered by the Supreme Court in the panel of judges of the First Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court in case No. 442/7418/25 dated June 1, 2026.

For many families of servicemen, not only the formal degree of kinship but also actual family relations, cohabitation, and financial support are decisive. Judicial practice in such cases shows that when determining the status of a dependent, the key importance lies in real life circumstances and the nature of assistance provided by the deceased family member.

Case circumstances

The grandmother of the deceased serviceman applied to the court with a claim to establish the fact of being dependent on her grandson from January 1, 2006, to June 14, 2024.

The claimant stated that after the death of her daughter, she effectively raised her grandson, was his guardian, and after he reached adulthood, they continued to live as one family. The grandson worked, provided the grandmother with food, medicine, paid necessary expenses, and effectively supported her. In 2023, he was officially appointed as the grandmother's assistant due to her health condition.

In March 2024, the grandson was mobilized into the Armed Forces of Ukraine. During a combat mission in the Luhansk region, he died as a result of military actions.

The claimant requested to establish the fact of being dependent on him to receive a pension due to the loss of a breadwinner and a one-time financial aid.

The court of first instance denied the claim, considering that the grandmother received an age pension and also had a daughter who was obliged to support her.

The appellate court overturned this decision and established the fact of the claimant being dependent on her grandson. The Ministry of Defense of Ukraine appealed the ruling in cassation, insisting that the presence of a pension and an adult daughter excludes the possibility of recognizing the grandmother as a dependent of the deceased serviceman.

Supreme Court's position

The court reminded that the right to one-time financial aid is granted, among others, to dependents of a deceased serviceman.

Dependents are considered family members entitled to a pension in case of loss of a breadwinner according to the Law of Ukraine "On pension provision for persons released from military service and some other persons" for a deceased (dead) serviceman, conscript, or reservist (a person released from military service whose death occurred within a year after release).

The Supreme Court pointed out that according to Article 31 of the Law of Ukraine "On pension provision for persons released from military service and some other persons," family members of the deceased are considered dependents if they were fully supported by him or received assistance from him that was a constant and primary source of livelihood for them.

The Supreme Court noted that family members of the deceased, for whom his assistance was a constant and primary source of livelihood but who themselves received any pension, have the right to switch to a new pension.

The court decided that the fact of a person being dependent on the deceased also matters for switching to a pension in case of loss of a breadwinner, which may be granted provided that the support was full or the assistance given to the dependent was a constant and primary source of livelihood even when the dependent (claimant) had earnings, received a pension, scholarship, etc.

The Supreme Court emphasized that in this case the appellate court established that the claimant is an incapacitated person receiving a pension significantly lower than the income of the deceased serviceman with whom she constantly lived, meaning the main and constant source of livelihood for the claimant was assistance from her grandson.

Also, the appellate court found that the claimant's daughter is a pensioner who lived alone and separately from the claimant during the disputed period and did not provide and was not financially able to provide full support to the claimant.

The court concluded that having fully and comprehensively examined the case circumstances, verified the evidence for relevance, admissibility, reliability, sufficiency, and mutual connection, and established that the grandmother was incapacitated and dependent on her grandson from January 1, 2006, to June 14, 2024, who died during military actions, the appellate court rightly satisfied the claim.

The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine and agreed with the appellate court's conclusions about the grandmother being dependent on her deceased serviceman grandson.

Thus, the Supreme Court confirmed that having one's own pension is not an unconditional ground for refusal to recognize a person as a dependent of the deceased breadwinner. The decisive factor remains the establishment of the fact that the deceased's assistance was a constant and primary source of livelihood for the person.

Also read in the "Judicial and Legal Newspaper" article about why families of deceased servicemen are forced to prove cohabitation as one family through the court and what problems arise when receiving payments.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page and Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.