Division of marital property: is a dispute over compensation for a share in foreign real estate subject to the jurisdiction of Ukrainian courts

A dispute between spouses over the recovery of monetary compensation for the value of a share in real estate located in a foreign country is not a dispute over property rights to such real estate if the claimed demand does not change the owner's title and does not require state registration of rights. Such a dispute does not fall under the rule of exclusive jurisdiction based on the location of the real estate and is subject to consideration by a Ukrainian court in civil proceedings. This conclusion was made by the Supreme Court in the composition of the panel of judges of the First Judicial Chamber of the Cassation Civil Court.

On May 6, 2026, the Cassation Civil Court of the Supreme Court considered, under simplified claim proceedings, the cassation appeal of Person_1 in the case filed by Person_1 against Person_2 regarding the division of marital property.

The court of first instance, whose conclusions were agreed upon by the appellate court, closed the proceedings in part of the claims for recovery from the defendant of monetary compensation for the value of hotel rooms located in the territory of the Republic of Georgia, based on paragraph 1 of part 1 of article 255 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine, explaining to the plaintiff the right to apply to the court at the location of the real estate.

The court decisions were motivated by the fact that the dispute concerns real estate located outside Ukraine, and therefore the dispute is subject to consideration by the foreign state court according to the rules of exclusive jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court disagreed with these conclusions of the courts, annulled the court decisions, and remanded the case for further consideration to the court of first instance for the following reasons.

Exclusive jurisdiction over disputes regarding real estate, as provided by part 1 of article 30 of the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine and norms of private international law, applies only to disputes whose subject is property rights to real estate.

If the claims are limited to the recovery of monetary compensation for the value of a share in real estate located abroad and do not involve changing the ownership title, legal regime of the property, or making changes to state registers, such a dispute is not a dispute over property rights to real estate.

The Supreme Court emphasized that the decisive factor for determining jurisdiction and venue is not the mere fact of the presence of real estate in the dispute, but the legal nature of the claimed demands. In the case of compensation recovery, the dispute is monetary in nature and aimed at reimbursing the value of the share, not resolving the issue of ownership rights to the real estate.

Therefore, there are no grounds for applying the rules of exclusive jurisdiction based on the location of the real estate or for closing the proceedings in the case.

The dispute is subject to consideration by Ukrainian courts in civil proceedings.

More details and the text of the Supreme Court ruling dated May 6, 2026, in case No. 334/6412/23 (proceeding No. 61-8418sv25) 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, page on Facebook and on Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.