Court denies man's claim for reimbursement of half the cost of ex-wife's breast augmentation surgery

The Supreme Court has considered a property division case in which a former husband sought compensation for half the cost of a breast augmentation surgery (endoprosthetics). The Court denied the husband's claim for reimbursement, noting that the case file contained no evidence that the former husband had objected to the surgery. This is stated in the decision of the Supreme Court as part of the panel of judges of the First Judicial Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court, reports UNN. 

Details 

As indicated in the court decision, the couple married on August 1, 2012, and in January 2022, the marriage was dissolved by a decision of the Ivano-Frankivsk City Court. During the marriage, the parties purchased a plot of land with an area of .0539 hectares using joint funds, and in 2019, the wife underwent breast augmentation surgery costing 4,000 euros. 

In court, the husband requested that the right to the land plot be recognized for him, and that the ownership of the funds used for the surgery be recognized for the wife. 

At the same time, the wife filed a counterclaim against the husband because, during the marriage, the couple purchased a 2018 Hyundai Santa Fe, which was registered in the husband's name. 

The woman claims that after they effectively stopped living together in October 2021, the husband sold the car without her knowledge, and she received no funds from the sale of the vehicle. 

The courts of previous instances recognized the husband's ownership of the land plot valued at 146,618 hryvnias and ordered him to pay the wife monetary compensation in the amount of 73,309 hryvnias for half the value of the plot. They also ordered him to pay 378,321 UAH — half the value of the alienated car. The court denied the claims regarding compensation for the breast augmentation.

In April, the Supreme Court upheld the decision, noting, in particular, that the courts of previous instances reached a generally correct conclusion regarding the existence of legal grounds for the division of property. 

The court of cassation supported the findings regarding the value of the land plot, confirmed by a forensic expert's report, and the legality of the compensation for the car, as the disputed vehicle was alienated by the former husband after the parties had ceased family relations and cohabitation, and without the former wife's consent.

Regarding the former husband's claim for compensation for half the cost of the medical surgery performed on the wife in 2019, the Supreme Court agreed with the refusal. Information indicating that the former husband objected to the surgery is absent from the case materials. The cassation appeal was dismissed. The Supreme Court's resolution entered into legal force from the moment of its adoption, is final, and is not subject to appeal.

Recall 

After the death of a husband or wife, the issue of property distribution often becomes one of the most difficult for a family. The inheritance procedure depends on whether the deceased left a will, what property was considered jointly acquired, and who exactly has the right to claim the inheritance by law. To avoid mistakes and misunderstandings, it is important to understand how inheritance law norms work in such cases and what rights the surviving spouse has.