The court ruled to take the child from the mother at the suit of ex-senator Malkin

The court ruled to take the child from the mother at the suit of ex-senator Malkin

[ad_1]

Themis determined the place of residence of a seven-year-old girl with her father and allowed the girl to be taken abroad without the consent of her mother

The Presnensky District Court considered questions on the suit of the former senator from Chukotka, Efim Malkin. Both proceedings ended in favor of the plaintiff.

Recall that the once richest member of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation (he was recognized as such after the publication of official declarations) Efim Malkin registered in one of his apartments in the Presnensky district and filed a lawsuit against his ex-wife with the Presnensky District Court. The former senator from Chukotka, who is called a partner of Roman Abramovich, asked Themis to determine the place of residence of his daughter with his father and allow the child to go to France with him without the consent of the mother.

As it became known to MK, on ​​June 13, the Presnensky District Court considered the issues from the lawsuit of Efim Malkin in two meetings. In both cases, Themis sided with the plaintiff, obliging the defendant to immediately execute the decision. Now the mother is obliged to hand over the seven-year-old girl, who lived with her all the time, to her father. And Efim Malkin received the right to go with his daughter to France, despite the prohibition of his mother.

The representative of the defendant, lawyer Georgy Chuguashvili, told MK that representatives of guardianship from the Presnensky district participated in both processes. Experts supported Yefim Malkin on the issue of determining the place of residence of the child with his father, and the decision to travel abroad was left to the discretion of the court. According to the defense counsel, the court relied on the fact that the girl’s mother was recognized by the FSSP as a malicious violator. At the same time, the father himself violated the agreements established earlier by the court, keeping his daughter at his place in excess of the allotted time. The mother’s side intends to raise the issue of unjust judgments.

[ad_2]

Source link