DETERMINATION BY THE COURT OF THE METHOD OF PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS AND INTERESTS OF A PARENT LIVING SEPARATELY FROM THE CHILD IN THE CONTEXT OF ENSURING CLARITY AND PRECISION OF THE COURT DECISION

Abstract

The article is devoted to the analysis of court opinions on removal of obstacles and determination of the manner of participation of a parent living separately in communication with a child and his/her upbringing and their impact on further exercise of parental rights after the court decision is made, enters into force and is enforced. The author establishes that the court decision contains the phrases adjusted for the implementation of meetings of a parent living separately from the child, in particular, “in the presence of the parent living together”, “at the request of the child”, “by agreement between the parents”. Based on the position of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, it is stated that the child’s wish cannot be the basis for a court decision, given the fact that the child is permanently living with one of the parents who has a conflict with the separated parent, which negatively affects the child’s perception of his or her personality. In the future, this formulation will lead to the maintenance of established obstacles to communication and upbringing of the child and the impossibility of enforcement of the decision. It is determined that the child’s wishes are constantly negatively adjusted by one of the cohabiting parents. In the case of an agreement between the parents, it was established that the court opinion with this statement was erroneous, since the basis of court disputes on this subject is a conflict between the parties, so in general such an action as an agreement is impossible. If one of the cohabiting parents is present at the meeting, there may be a risk of conflicts with the children involving the cohabiting parent, which will prevent the cohabiting parent from establishing contact with the child and will negatively affect the child’s psychological and emotional state. The author also analyses court cases on the actions or inaction of state enforcement officers and identifies certain problems, in particular, significant delays in imposing a fine on the debtor in case of failure to comply with a court decision, failure to carry out enforcement actions within a certain time, and drafting acts on the execution of a court decision without actually performing the actions specified in the court decision.