A child can live alternately with his mother and father after a divorce: the Supreme Court made an important decision

The Supreme Court confirmed that after the parents’ divorce, the child may live alternately with the mother and the father. This model of joint physical custody is allowed even in the absence of consent between the parents, if it meets the best interests of the child.

The Supreme Court set out the relevant legal position in its resolution of October 9, 2026 in case No. 607/21670/24

Why did the parents go to court

In October 2024, the mother of a minor girl filed a lawsuit to determine the place of residence of her daughter with her.

The woman explained that conflicts arise between the parents, since the father periodically takes the child to his place and does not always return it at the agreed time.

At the same time, the mother did not object to the daughter’s communication with the father.

The man filed a counterclaim, in which he requested to establish joint physical custody. He proposed that the child live half of the month with the mother, and the other half with him.

The court of first instance partially satisfied both claims and determined a different order: the child should live with each parent alternately for one week.

The Court of Appeal upheld this decision.

What the Supreme Court decided

The mother appealed the decision, arguing that a constant change of residence could negatively affect the psychological state of her daughter.

However, the Supreme Court did not agree with her arguments.

The judges established that both parents properly fulfill their duties, have appropriate living conditions and maintain a close emotional bond with the child.

In addition, the parents actually live in the same city, and the courts did not establish evidence that alternating residence poses a threat to the girl’s development.

As a result, the Supreme Court left the decisions of the previous instances unchanged.

Should the child have the primary right to reside with the child

The Supreme Court emphasized that the legislation does not automatically give the mother or father an advantage when determining the child’s place of residence.

The main criterion is not the formal equality of parental rights, but ensuring the best interests of the child.

When considering such disputes, the courts must take into account:

The child’s emotional connection with each parent.

Living conditions and opportunities for development.

The parents’ attitude to fulfilling their duties.

The child’s psychological state.

Place of study and stable social ties.

The possibility of ensuring a safe and stable environment.

Are the child’s own opinions taken into account?

The Supreme Court also explained that the child’s opinion must be taken into account when resolving disputes regarding his or her residence.

At the same time, the child’s desire to stay with one of the parents is not an unconditional basis for making a corresponding decision.

The court must assess whether such a choice is truly in his or her interests.

Psychological tests, conclusions of guardianship and trusteeship bodies, child testimony, and other evidence may be used for this purpose.

Does the court necessarily have to agree with the guardianship body

In this case, the guardianship and trusteeship body recommended determining the girl’s place of residence together with her mother.

However, the courts have made a different decision.

The Supreme Court explained that the conclusion of the guardianship body does not have a predetermined legal force.

The court may disagree with it if the document is insufficiently substantiated or contradicts the interests of the child.

What does this decision mean for other parents

The Supreme Court’s ruling confirms the possibility of applying the model of joint physical custody, in which the child lives alternately with both parents according to a set schedule.

At the same time, this does not mean that after each divorce the child must necessarily spend the same amount of time with the mother and father.

Each case is considered individually, and the decisive criterion remains the best interests of the child, her psychological comfort, safety and stability of living conditions.

Thus, the Supreme Court confirmed the legality of the child’s alternating residence with both parents and left in force the decision according to which the girl will spend one week with her mother and the next with her father.