Does a child born after the death of a military father have the right to 15 million UAH: Supreme Court's answer
The Cassation Administrative Court of the Supreme Court confirmed that a child conceived during the life of a serviceman but born after his death belongs to the circle of persons entitled to a one-time financial assistance due to the death of the serviceman.
The Cassation Administrative Court of the Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts, which recognized the refusal of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine to grant such assistance to the minor daughter of the deceased serviceman as unlawful.
At the same time, the Supreme Court drew attention to an important distinction. If the child was declared at the initial stage of consideration as a person entitled to the one-time financial assistance, the Ministry of Defense cannot refuse her solely because she was born after the father's death. However, in cases where the one-time financial assistance has already been assigned and paid to other family members, the child's right is realized not by a new payment from the state budget, but by redistributing the already paid amount among the recipients by mutual agreement or through court proceedings.
Circumstances of the case
A woman applied to the court on behalf of her minor daughter, whose father died during a combat mission.
The couple was legally married. The child was conceived during the serviceman's lifetime but was born after his death. When processing documents, the military unit command included the daughter in the list of persons entitled to one-time financial assistance, alongside the wife and mother of the deceased.
However, in March 2023, the Ministry of Defense commission assigned the one-time financial assistance of 15 million UAH only to the mother and wife of the serviceman, dividing it equally between them.
After that, the child's mother applied to the Ministry of Defense for the one-time financial assistance for her daughter but was refused. The Ministry argued that the right to assistance arises on the day of the serviceman's death, and since the child was born later, she is not among those entitled to the payment.
What the courts decided
The Mykolaiv District Administrative Court satisfied the claim. The Fifth Administrative Court of Appeal agreed with this decision.
The Ministry of Defense filed a cassation appeal. The agency argued that at the time of the serviceman's death, the law did not explicitly provide the right for children born after the father's death to receive assistance. Moreover, the Ministry noted that the entire amount had already been distributed among other family members, so further disputes over the funds should be resolved among the recipients, not involving the ministry.
Supreme Court's position
The Cassation Administrative Court disagreed with the Ministry of Defense's arguments.
The Supreme Court reminded that the one-time financial assistance is compensatory in nature and aimed at material support for the family members of the deceased serviceman after the loss of the breadwinner.
The court also confirmed its previously established legal position that excluding a child from the list of recipients solely because she was born after the father's death contradicts the purpose of legislation on social and legal protection of servicemen, the principle of equality of children's rights, and the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The law also provides protection for the interests of a conceived but not yet born child.
Therefore, a child conceived during the serviceman's life and born after his death belongs to the circle of persons entitled to one-time financial assistance due to the father's death.
Why the Supreme Court disagreed with the argument about the already paid 15 million UAH
The Supreme Court separately analyzed the Ministry of Defense's report that the assistance had already been assigned and paid to the wife and mother of the deceased serviceman.
The panel of judges emphasized that in case 400/6411/24, the primary issue was not the redistribution of funds but the existence of the child's right to receive the one-time financial assistance.
The court stressed that establishing the child's right to receive the assistance precedes the resolution of the issue of redistributing the already paid amount among recipients. Therefore, the child's right to assistance cannot depend on whether such redistribution has taken place.
How this case differs from other Supreme Court practice
The Supreme Court also referred to its ruling dated November 17, 2025, in case No. 560/12192/24, where it concluded that if the one-time assistance has already been assigned and paid to other family members, the child cannot receive an additional payment from the state budget. In such cases, the child's right is realized by redistributing the already paid amount among recipients by mutual agreement or through court proceedings.
However, as the Supreme Court noted, the circumstances of this case are different.
The mother applied for the one-time financial assistance both for herself and her daughter back in November 2022, submitting a full set of documents. The military unit command included the child in the conclusion as a person entitled to assistance, but the Ministry of Defense unjustifiably did not consider her when making the payment decision.
Under these circumstances, the Supreme Court agreed with the conclusions of the lower courts about the unlawfulness of the Ministry of Defense commission's decision and confirmed that the proper remedy is to cancel this decision and oblige the Ministry of Defense to reconsider the mother's application as the child's legal representative, based on the fact that the daughter has the right to receive the one-time financial assistance. At the same time, the issue of possible redistribution of the already paid amount should be resolved separately after establishing such a right.
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 account to stay updated on the most important events.
