Adopting a Child Abroad Without Ukraine's Permission: The Supreme Court Explained the Consequences

Adoption of a child who is a Ukrainian citizen by birth ("by right of blood") by a foreigner outside Ukraine is recognized as valid in Ukraine only if prior permission is obtained from the central executive authority responsible for state policy in adoption and child rights protection. Acquiring citizenship of another country by the child does not exempt from this requirement. If international adoption is carried out without such permission, it is not valid in Ukraine and therefore does not constitute an obstacle, within the meaning of part two of Article 169 of the Family Code of Ukraine, to the restoration of parental rights to the biological father. This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court.

On May 13, 2026, the Cassation Civil Court of the Supreme Court reviewed in written proceedings the cassation appeal of a man in a case filed by the man against a woman, with a third party – the Child Services of the Chernihiv State Administration of Chernihiv Region, regarding the restoration of parental rights.

To substantiate his claims, the plaintiff stated that he (a citizen of Ukraine) and the defendant (a citizen of the Republic of Belarus) were married, and in 2008 their son was born in Ukraine. After the divorce, the child remained living with the mother, who soon remarried a French citizen, changed the child's surname, and effectively ceased proper communication between the father and the child, systematically obstructing his contact with his son. In 2017, the court deprived the plaintiff of parental rights based on expert conclusions about "psychological violence" by the father. The father underwent intensive psychocorrection for several years, learned to control his emotions, created a new family (has two daughters), and received positive assessments from guardianship authorities. In 2019, in France, the stepfather adopted the child under French law as a citizen of Belarus, without applying to Ukrainian authorities.

In 2023, the biological father filed a lawsuit to restore his parental rights.

The court of first instance, whose conclusions were upheld by the appellate court, denied the claim. The courts' decisions were motivated by the fact that the child is a citizen of the Republic of Belarus, lawfully adopted in France, and therefore the provisions of the Family Code of Ukraine do not apply to these legal relations. Additionally, the appellate court noted that Ukrainian citizenship does not arise automatically but requires procedural formalization, and indicated that the plaintiff did not prove that restoring his rights was in the best interests of the child.

The Supreme Court disagreed with the courts' conclusions, annulled the court decisions, and adopted a new decision granting the claim based on the following.

A child, one of whose parents at the time of birth was a citizen of Ukraine and who was born in Ukraine, is a citizen of Ukraine from birth. No additional actions or declarations of will by the parents are required for this.

Therefore, the personal law of the child is Ukrainian legislation. According to Article 282 of the Family Code of Ukraine, adoption of a child-citizen of Ukraine living abroad by a foreigner is valid in Ukraine only if prior permission is obtained from the central executive authority of Ukraine. Since such permission was not granted, the adoption of the plaintiff's son in France is not valid in Ukraine.

The provision of part 2 of Article 169 of the Family Code of Ukraine on the impossibility of restoring rights in case of adoption applies only when such adoption is valid in Ukraine. Since the legal fact of adoption does not exist under Ukrainian law, there are no obstacles to restoring the biological father's rights.

In this case, the father proved with proper and admissible evidence the elimination of circumstances that were the grounds for depriving him of parental rights (part 4 of Article 169 of the Family Code of Ukraine).

The appellate court erred by shifting the burden of proof exclusively onto the plaintiff.

The Supreme Court noted that according to Articles 12 and 81 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, it is the defendant (the mother), who opposed the claim, who had to prove that risks to the child remain and that contact with the father would be contrary to the child's interests. Unjustified refusal to restore parental rights despite stable positive changes in the father's behavior constitutes a disproportionate interference with the right to respect for family life, guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

More details and the text of the Supreme Court ruling of May 13, 2026, in case No. 753/5734/23 (proceeding No. 61-3813sv25) can be found at this link.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp pages, and follow us on Facebook and Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.