Here is the detailed analysis of the court decision, prepared in accordance with your request:
1. **Subject of the dispute:** The dispute concerns the lawfulness of the refusal by the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine to pay the family members of a deceased serviceman a one-time financial aid in the amount of UAH 15 million, as provided for by Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 168, instead of the payment in a smaller amount assigned under general rules.
2. **Court’s arguments:**
– The Supreme Court, composed of a judicial panel in this case, has officially departed from its previous legal positions (in particular, in cases No. 600/548/23-a and No. 380/9868/23), which previously allowed for a broader interpretation of the right to receive the UAH 15 million payment.
– The Court emphasized that the concept of “death” (demise) in the context of Resolution No. 168 is not synonymous with any death of a serviceman during martial law.
– The key criterion for receiving the increased payment is the existence of a causal link between the death and a wound, contusion, injury, or mutilation sustained while defending the Motherland.
– The mere fact that the disease which led to death is connected to the defense of the Motherland is not an automatic basis for the UAH 15 million payment, provided that a link to a wound or injury is not proven.
– Since the cause of death in this case was acute cardiovascular failure (a disease), rather than a wound, the lower courts lawfully denied the claim in this part.
– At the same time, the Court pointed out a procedural error by the lower instances, which failed to take into account the death of one of the plaintiffs during the proceedings, which requires a review of the issue of legal succession.
3. **Court decision:** The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts regarding the refusal to pay UAH 15 million to other plaintiffs, but overturned these decisions in the part concerning the claims of the deceased plaintiff and remanded the case to the court of first instance for a new trial to resolve the issue of legal succession.
