**1. Subject of the dispute:**
\nThe subject of the dispute is the establishment of the fact of a woman cohabiting as a single family with a military serviceman without marriage registration for the purpose of receiving a one-time monetary allowance in connection with his death during combat operations.<\/p>\n
**2. Court arguments:**
\n* The Supreme Court departed from the previous position of the lower courts, which held that a “common-law wife” a priori has no right to such assistance, as she was not explicitly mentioned in the list of recipients of assistance under the law effective at the time of the serviceman’s death.
\n* The Supreme Court emphasized that a court decision confirming the fact of cohabitation, maintaining a joint household, and the existence of mutual rights and obligations is a sufficient basis for recognizing a person as a family member of a deceased military serviceman.
\n* The Court underscored that the specifics of military service under martial law (remote communication, absence of joint registration) should not be an obstacle to proving the fact of family relations.
\n* The cassation instance indicated that the courts of lower instances took a formalistic approach to the assessment of evidence, failing to give due weight to the submitted correspondence, bank statements of fund transfers, and witness testimony.
\n* The Court of Appeal committed a procedural error by failing to provide a reasoned response to the plaintiff’s arguments regarding her proof of the signs of family life, which constitutes a violation of the standards of a fair trial.
\n* Therefore, the Supreme Court recognized that the courts did not fully investigate the circumstances of the case, and thus the conclusions regarding the plaintiff’s lack of right to assistance were premature and erroneous.<\/p>\n
**3. Court decision:**
\nThe Supreme Court partially granted the cassation appeal, overturned the ruling of the Court of Appeal regarding the dismissal of the claim, and remanded the case to the court of appeal for a new trial for the proper examination of evidence.<\/p>\n