Eviction is not possible. Leave it!
Thus, a resident of Vitebsk, K., filed a lawsuit with the court, in which he indicated that he is the owner of the apartment, and during the period from 2005 to 2009 he was married to the defendant K., they have a common eleven-year-old son. After the divorce, by court decision, the minor was transferred to the upbringing of the defendant, and the ex-wife and son remained registered in the apartment owned by the plaintiff, and live there to this day. Since K. created a new family, living together in one apartment of two families became difficult, in connection with which he purchased a room in a three-room apartment located in the same settlement for the resettlement of his ex-wife with his son, which is what he asked the court for.
The court's decision to deny K.'s claim was reasonably refused due to the following circumstances.
The provisions of Article 74 of the Code of the Republic of Belarus on Marriage and Family stipulate that the place of residence of a child is considered the place of residence of his parents. That is, the apartment owned by the plaintiff K. is the place of residence of his minor son, which excludes his eviction.
According to the norms of paragraph 1 of Article 157 of the Housing Code of the Republic of Belarus, children have the right to reside freely in the apartment, use it equally with the owner and demand from him the elimination of violations of their right to own and use residential premises. Since by court decision the minor was transferred to the mother's upbringing, evicting only K. from the apartment may entail the forced separation of the child from the mother or the forced abandonment by the minor of his place of residence with his mother, which may lead to a violation of the housing rights of the minor, as well as his right to live in a family with his mother.
Taking into account the provisions of the legislation cited, the prosecutor, who participated in the consideration of this case, expressed the opinion that the plaintiff's claims were unfounded and that the claim should be dismissed.
Prosecutor of the Department for Supervision of Compliance with the Law of Judicial Decisions in Civil Cases of the Regional Prosecutor's Office Daria Butsenko
Senior Prosecutor of the Department for Supervision of Compliance with the Law of Judicial Decisions in Civil Cases N.M. Belova