The Transcarpathian District Administrative Court has upheld the claim of a conscripted man who was prohibited by border guards from leaving the country while accompanying his wife with a disability, as they considered their marriage to be fictitious. The man won the case in court, declaring the border guards' prohibition unlawful and overturning it.
As stated in the decision, which was published in the court registry in January 2025, a conscripted man approached the court after attempting to cross the border at the "Luzhanka" checkpoint in August 2024 with his wife, who has a third group disability. The couple married in January 2024. Border guards denied the man entry, deeming their marriage fictitious.
The plaintiff claims he provided the border guards with his military ID, a certificate from the medical and social expert commission, an individual rehabilitation program for his wife, and a marriage certificate. A representative of the border guard unit submitted a response to the claim, denying that the man had provided his military registration document, but failed to provide any evidence when required by the court. This case was presided over by Judge Ruslan Vashchilin, who emphasized that the refusal to cross the border was allegedly based on the supposed fictitiousness of the plaintiff's marriage, rather than a lack of certain documents.
“According to part 2 of Article 40 of the Family Code of Ukraine, a marriage is declared invalid by a court decision in the event of its fictitiousness. Therefore, the fictitiousness of a marriage can only be established in a judicial manner. No evidence of a court decision declaring the marriage invalid due to fictitiousness was provided by the border guard unit. Furthermore, the court finds the defendant's references to different places of residence and different surnames, which he believes indicate the fictitiousness of the marriage, to be unfounded, as the State Border Guard Service is not authorized to declare a marriage fictitious”, the judge stated.
Ruslan Vashchilin granted the man's claim, recognizing the border guards' refusal to allow crossing the border as unlawful and overturning it. The court's decision can still be appealed.