1. The subject of the dispute is the determination of the place of residence of a minor child between her grandmother and father after the death of the child’s mother.
2. The courts of previous instances granted the grandmother’s claim, determining the child’s place of residence with her, based on the child’s best interests, psychological state, and established social connections, since the child had lived with the grandmother for a long time, who provided her upbringing and care, and also taking into account the conclusion of the children’s affairs service on the expediency of such a decision. The Court of Appeal agreed with this decision, considering that it was in the child’s best interests. The Supreme Court, however, pointed out that the courts did not take into account the father’s preferential right to live with the child, and also did not hear the opinion of the child, who had reached the age of 10, regarding her place of residence, which is a violation of the norms of substantive and procedural law. The Supreme Court departed from its previous position, since in this case a dispute arose between the grandmother and the father regarding the child’s place of residence, and not between the parents.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal and sent the case for a new trial to the Court of Appeal to take into account the child’s opinion and the father’s preferential right.
