The ex-wife of ex-senator Malkin complained about violations of the order of communication with her daughter
[ad_1]
She wrote an appeal to the bailiffs
The scandal in the family of a billionaire from Chukotka and a former member of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Efim Malkin has reached a new level. Previously, the businessman repeatedly filed lawsuits to determine the order of communication with his daughter from art consultant Anastasia Gulynskaya and even tried to take away the rights to the child from the mother. This time, billionaire Efim Malkin, once the richest senator in the Federation Council of the Russian Federation, turned to bailiffs about the actions of his ex-wife.
As it became known to MK, the essence of the claims is that the ex-wife of the politician allegedly violates the procedure for communicating with her daughter established back in 2021. Three days after the filing of the application, the FSSP opened proceedings against Anastasia Gulynskaya. She, in turn, stated that she had not violated anything, on the contrary, she made concessions to her ex-husband and father of her child in his requests to change the schedule or provide additional days off. And she also went on the attack – she wrote a complaint to the bailiff service (while her appeal remains without attention). From the explanation of Anastasia Gulynskaya, it follows that Efim Malkin took his 7-year-old daughter for the weekend and took her to St. Petersburg without warning. Being with his father, the child missed music classes (the girl is seriously into music and she has an important exam ahead of her) and school.
Commentary of the representative of Gulynskaya lawyer Victoria Krylova.
“Since the birth of the child, the father has initiated three lawsuits and is actively contacting the bailiff service. The child is currently being held by the father at his place of residence, which grossly violates the rights of the mother and child. Tomorrow we are submitting a writ of execution to the bailiffs and demand the return of the child.”
[ad_2]
Source link
