Mobilized explained in which case they will have to pay alimony

The State Duma this week adopted in the first reading a bill that suspends the consideration in courts of civil cases, where the defendant is mobilized, as well as the execution of court decisions to recover funds from them. The moratorium will not apply to executive documents related to the payment of alimony or compensation for harm in connection with the death of the breadwinner.

The bill was introduced by a group of senators and deputies from the United Russia, and Right-wing Russian deputy Andrey Kuznetsov. Igor Antropenko (“ER”), speaking at the plenary session on behalf of the authors, recalled that now the Arbitration Procedure Code (APC), the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the Code of Administrative Procedure (CAS) and the law on enforcement proceedings regulate issues in different ways related to the suspension of the consideration of cases in cases where the parties to the process take part in hostilities. Different formulations give rise to legal uncertainty. Before Russia launched a special military operation in February 2022, and the president announced partial mobilization by decree in September, this legal uncertainty did not create any particular problems, and judicial practice was “insignificant,” the explanatory note to the bill says. But now problems have arisen – suffice it to recall that none of the current wording of existing laws protects the rights of mobilized and volunteers before they enter the combat zone – during distribution, preparation, training and combat coordination.

And so it was decided to introduce the same list of grounds for suspending trials and enforcement proceedings: the participation of the defendant in military operations as part of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations and bodies; his participation in the counter-terrorist operation; performance of tasks in a state of emergency or martial law, armed conflict; call for military service on mobilization; conclusion of a contract on voluntary assistance in the performance of tasks assigned to the RF Armed Forces. This, according to the authors of the bill, will provide a “single approach” to ensuring the procedural rights of not only those in the army, but also the National Guard, the police, the FSB, the Ministry of Emergency Situations, the prosecutor’s office, the Investigative Committee, as well as those mobilized and volunteers. But all of the above cases cannot be grounds for suspending enforcement proceedings on the recovery of alimony in respect of minors (in relation to parents – they can), and on the recovery of damages in connection with the death of the breadwinner: “taking into account the social significance of these types of payments.”

Courts for criminal and administrative cases will not be suspended – there is no talk of amending the Criminal Code and the Code of Administrative Offenses in this case.

Another author of the initiative, Dmitry Vyatkin (ER), on behalf of the relevant Committee on State Construction and Legislation, said that when finalizing the text for the second reading, several more important points would have to be settled. Take, for example, the question of the arrest of funds mobilized under existing enforcement proceedings: the fact is that the money that they receive for military service after mobilization is already protected from collection by another law adopted earlier, but all other funds in the accounts are still no.

During the discussion we talked a lot about alimony. Aleksey Kurinny (KPRF) asked what “a woman will feed her child” if the court hearing on alimony “hangs”, that is, is suspended. Mr. Vyatkin said that it would be wrong not to suspend such civil proceedings, because if he is mobilized in the zone of a special military operation, he cannot present his arguments to the court, and disputes over alimony cases can be complex, sometimes an examination of paternity is required .

The Family Code, we recall, establishes child support in the amount of 25% of “earnings and (or) other income of parents” if there is one child, 30% if there are two children, and 50% if there are three or more children. The size of the shares may be reduced or increased by the court, taking into account the financial or marital status of the parties and other noteworthy circumstances. Circumstances affecting the outcome are the presence of other minors or adult disabled children, or adult dependents, low income, health status, if it interferes with earning more. Child support for a disabled child may be increased from the normal share. At the same time, Article 108 of the UK allows the court, when considering a civil case on the recovery of alimony, to make a decision on payments even before the end of the process. Will payments under such orders be suspended if the defendant went to the war zone in a different status, and the process itself is temporarily frozen?

“The mobilization call does not suspend a parent’s obligation to support their child. Citizens called up for military service receive monetary allowance (salaries, daily allowances, allowances, allowances, sick leave, vacation and other payments), from which alimony is withheld. In this regard, the introduction of a rule on the inadmissibility of suspending enforcement proceedings on alimony obligations seems reasonable and fully consistent with the protection of the rights of children to receive the amounts of maintenance due to them, ”said lawyer Victoria Dergunova to MK. If the court before the final decision decides on the payment of alimony for the period of consideration of the dispute, then “for such a court ruling, a writ of execution is also issued, which the interested party (collector) can present to the bailiff service, after which enforcement proceedings will be initiated, and on it will also be covered by the rule proposed in the bill if it becomes law,” she explained. That is, alimony will be collected. When the mobilized or serviceman returns, the court will resume and make a final decision, “the recoverer will have to receive a new writ of execution against him and file an application to initiate new enforcement proceedings,” Ms. Dergunova specified.

“We are well aware that it often depends on the payment of alimony how the children and mothers who stayed with them will live. We will analyze all the casuistry, including alimony payments, when preparing the bill for the second reading,” Mr. Vyatkin said in a conversation with MK.

Deputies from the “SR” and the Liberal Democratic Party, however, propose to resolve the issue of the debts of the mobilized more radically. Oleg Nilov (“SR”) said that the state should take upon itself the payment of all obligations sent to fight in general – otherwise those to whom the money is due may be left with nothing at all, “if the defendant, God forbid, dies or is seriously injured” . And Evgeny Markov (LDPR) said that the state should take upon itself at least the payment of all alimony for those mobilized. “It must be understood that many of those called up as part of the mobilization have not one family, but two, and sometimes even three. This must be taken into account. I’m just afraid that today’s decision may lead to a situation where the soldiers we sent to protect our state interests will actually work only for alimony,” he said. Mr. Vyatkin, in response, recalled that the obligations to compensate for damages are personal in nature, “it would be tempting, of course, to say that now the state will pay for everything, but nothing is known about the amount that will be required for this, and I think there is not enough money in the budget.” By the way, on the same day, the State Duma adopted in the third reading the law on the budget for 2023-25 ​​- a deficit one.

There is one more issue that will certainly be discussed when finalizing the text of the bill. Although the writs of execution on credit debts of those mobilized seem to have been suspended by a law already adopted, but commercial banks are beginning to collect this money from families, such facts are known. Mr. Vyatkin acknowledged that there was a problem. The fact is that sometimes liability for loans is joint and several, and if the borrower was not only mobilized, but also other citizens, and not necessarily members of his family, they begin to demand the full amount of the debt from them …