Former son-in-law invested over 200 thousand in mother-in-law's apartment renovation, but was left homeless after divorce: were the expenses compensated

The Poltava Court of Appeal partially satisfied the claim of a man who was evicted from an apartment owned by his former mother-in-law after the divorce.

The court concluded that the plaintiff is a bona fide acquirer (possessor) within the meaning of Article 390 of the Civil Code of Ukraine and may demand compensation from the owner for expenses on inseparable improvements made to the property.

At the same time, since the renovation was carried out during the marriage using funds that are joint marital property, the court awarded him only half of the documented expenses.

Circumstances of the case

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit after being evicted from the apartment owned by his former mother-in-law. He stated that after purchasing the apartment in 2015, he lived there with his wife and children, and to make the home suitable for the family, he organized a major renovation, contracted a contractor, and paid for the completed work. After the divorce, he was evicted by court decision, and the renovation costs were not voluntarily reimbursed, so he filed a claim. During the case, a forensic construction and technical examination established that the documented cost of the actually performed work amounted to UAH 133,830.31.

Decision of the court of first instance

The Semenivka District Court of Poltava region dismissed the claim. The court concluded that the plaintiff did not prove that the renovation was carried out with his own funds, while the defendant claimed she financed the renovation herself. Moreover, the local court considered the scope of work performed under the contractor agreement unproven.

Conclusions of the appellate court

The Poltava Court of Appeal disagreed with these conclusions.

The panel of judges established that the case materials 547/462/22 confirm a large-scale renovation in the apartment in two stages — in 2015 and 2017. This was supported by testimonies of independent witnesses, the contractor agreement, the act of completed works, and the conclusion of the forensic construction and technical examination. The expert determined that the documented cost of the actually performed works is UAH 133,830.31.

The appellate court also noted that after the renovation, the apartment underwent significant changes: from a one-room apartment it was effectively remodeled into a two-room apartment, allowing a family of four to live there. The court recognized these as inseparable improvements to the property.

According to the panel of judges, the plaintiff is a bona fide acquirer (possessor) within the meaning of Article 390 of the Civil Code of Ukraine and therefore has the right to demand compensation from the owner for inseparable improvements made. The court also referred to the legal position of the Supreme Court set out in the ruling dated March 3, 2021, in case No. 766/8694/16-c, according to which a bona fide acquirer (possessor) may demand compensation from the owner for inseparable improvements to the property.

The court awarded only half of the expenses

At the same time, the appellate court refused to recover the entire claimed amount.

The panel established that the renovation was carried out during the marriage of the plaintiff and the owner’s daughter. The court found it proven that the plaintiff had sufficient income to finance the renovation, while the defendant did not provide proper evidence that she paid for the works.

At the same time, the court applied the provisions of Article 60 of the Family Code of Ukraine, according to which income earned by spouses during the marriage is their joint marital property. Since the renovation was financed during this period, the appellate court concluded that the plaintiff can claim compensation for only half of the documented expenses, i.e., UAH 66,915.15.

Final decision

The Poltava Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the court of first instance and made a new ruling.

The court partially satisfied the claim and ordered the apartment owner to pay the plaintiff UAH 66,915.15 for the actual cost of the renovation and reconstruction works. In addition, the court awarded UAH 9,087.40 for the costs of the forensic examination and UAH 10,000 for professional legal assistance.

At the same time, UAH 7,500 was recovered from the plaintiff in favor of the defendant for legal assistance costs, and UAH 1,672.88 was recovered from the defendant in favor of the state as court fees.

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