1. The subject of the dispute is the right of family members of a deceased military serviceman to receive a one-time monetary allowance in the amount of 15,000,000 UAH, as provided by Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 168, in the event of the serviceman’s death resulting from an illness rather than a combat injury.
2. The Supreme Court in this case departed from a previous position set forth in a number of decisions where courts erroneously held that any death of a military serviceman during martial law entitles the family to the 15 million UAH payment. The Court emphasized that Resolution No. 168 establishes an exhaustive list of grounds for such payment: either death during combat operations or death resulting from a wound, contusion, or mutilation sustained while defending the Motherland. Death from an illness, even if it is related to the defense of the Motherland, does not serve as an automatic basis for receiving this specific increased amount. The Court clearly distinguished between the concepts of “death in action” and “death resulting from illness,” indicating that the latter should be governed by other legislative provisions (Law No. 2011-XII and Procedure No. 975). Since in this instance death occurred due to acute heart failure and not due to a wound, there are no grounds for applying the “wartime” Resolution No. 168. Thus, the Court established that an expanded interpretation of this provision without proper evidence of a causal link to a wound constitutes incorrect application of the law.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the appellate court’s ruling and upheld the judgment of the court of first instance, which had denied the plaintiffs’ claim for the 15,000,000 UAH payment.
