1. The subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of living as one family without registration of marriage between the applicant and the deceased person for the purpose of receiving social benefits.
2. The court of first instance, with which the court of appeal agreed, granted the application, establishing the fact that the applicant and the deceased person lived as one family on the basis of the available evidence and testimonies of witnesses, which confirmed cohabitation, joint management of the household, and the existence of mutual rights and obligations. The court took into account that the establishment of this fact creates legal consequences for the applicant to receive social benefits, and the current legislation does not provide for any other procedure for establishing such a fact. The appellate court also rejected the arguments of the Pension Fund that the case should be considered in the order of administrative proceedings, noting that civil courts consider cases on the establishment of facts on which the emergence of subjective rights of citizens depends. The Supreme Court agreed with these conclusions, noting that the courts of previous instances correctly applied the norms of substantive and procedural law, properly examined the evidence and established all the necessary circumstances for granting the application. The Supreme Court also noted that the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court departed from previous conclusions regarding the jurisdiction of such disputes, confirming that cases on the establishment of facts of legal significance are resolved by courts of civil jurisdiction.
3. The Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal, and the decisions of the previous instances remained unchanged.
