★★★★★ 5.0 ON GOOGLE · CLIENT REVIEWS | AVAILABLE 24/7
Author: Ilona Melnychuk, attorneyThe key points in brief
Divorcing a person who has debts most often frightens people with a single question: will you have to pay someone else’s loans out of your own pocket. Ukrainian law clearly distinguishes between the personal and joint obligations of spouses, and it is precisely this distinction that determines whose property will be at risk of enforcement. Below we will get to the heart of the matter: which debts are considered joint and which personal, whether the other spouse is liable, how enforcement officers act, and what actually protects your property as of 2026.
No. Divorce does not turn one spouse’s personal debt into a joint one and does not divide it between the former spouses automatically.
A credit agreement, a promissory note, or a loan agreement creates an obligation only for the person who signed it. The other person does not become a debtor merely by virtue of being married. For a debt to be considered joint, its joint character must be separately proved under the rules of Articles 65 and 73 of the Family Code. That is why it is important not to confuse two different questions: the division of joint property, that is, assets, and the fate of debts, that is, liabilities. These are separate matters that the court considers under different rules. We describe the division of assets in detail in the article on the division of property, and here we will focus specifically on debts.
Joint obligations are those that one spouse took in the interests of the family and the funds from which were actually used for its needs; all other debts remain personal.
The legal basis is simple. Part 4 of Article 65 of the Family Code provides: an agreement concluded by one spouse in the interests of the family creates obligations for the other spouse if the property obtained under the agreement is used in the interests of the family. Part 2 of Article 73 adds: enforcement may be directed at joint property if the court has established that the agreement was concluded in the interests of the family and what was obtained was used for its needs.
Subject to proof of the family’s interests, the following are most often classed as joint: a loan to buy or renovate the family home, a loan for a car for the family, a consumer loan for household appliances for the home. Personal debts usually include: a debt that arose before the marriage; a loan taken for purely personal needs; gambling debts; obligations under a personal business without the knowledge and consent of the other spouse; suretyship for a third party; fines, tax debts, compensation for harm caused personally by one spouse; arrears of child support for a child from previous relationships. The key idea: the mere fact that a loan was taken out during the marriage does not yet make it joint. What matters is the purpose of the loan and the actual use of the funds.
You are not liable for the other spouse’s personal debt either with your personal property or with your share in joint property.
Part 1 of Article 73 of the Family Code directly provides: for the obligations of one spouse, enforcement may be levied only on that spouse’s personal property and on the share in the right of joint common ownership allocated to them in kind. Therefore, the debtor’s creditors may claim only two resources: the debtor’s personal property (under Article 57, this is property acquired before the marriage, gifted, inherited, or bought with personal funds) and the debtor’s share in the spouses’ joint property. Your personal property and your half of the joint property remain out of reach for the other spouse’s personal debts.
There are exceptions worth knowing about. Part 2 of Article 73 allows enforcement to be directed at all joint property too, if it is proved that the debt was taken in the interests of the family. And Part 3 of the same article concerns compensation for harm caused by a criminal offense of one spouse: enforcement may be directed at property acquired during the marriage if the court has established that it was bought with funds obtained as a result of that offense.
A separate word about bank accounts. For a personal debt of one spouse, an enforcement officer has no right to write off funds from the account or card of the other, since this is another person’s property. If your personal or salary account has been mistakenly frozen because of your husband’s or wife’s debt, this is grounds to apply to the enforcement officer and the court to lift the seizure. That is why, when divorcing a debtor, it is advisable to separate accounts and not keep joint funds together with funds that enforcement may be directed at.
Whoever relies on it must prove the joint character of a debt: most often this is the creditor or the spouse who seeks to shift part of the debt onto the other.
The Supreme Court consistently proceeds from the position that the mere fact of marriage or the existence of a promissory note is not enough to recognize an obligation as joint. It is necessary to prove a combination of circumstances: the agreement was concluded in the interests of the family, the other spouse knew or should have known about it, and the funds obtained actually went to the family’s needs. If there is no such evidence, the debt remains the personal debt of the person who took it. We deliberately do not cite specific case numbers, since each situation is assessed individually on the available evidence, but the courts’ general approach is exactly this. For you this means something practical: keep documents showing where the loan funds went, because they can both confirm and refute the joint nature of the debt.
As a rule, the court does not cut the debt itself in half and does not make the other spouse a debtor to the bank without the creditor’s consent.
The reason lies in a basic principle of civil law: a debtor in an obligation cannot be replaced without the creditor’s consent. Therefore, legally the loan remains with the person who signed the agreement with the bank. What the court can actually do: recognize an obligation as joint and apply joint and several liability of the spouses for such a debt; take a joint debt into account when dividing property or award monetary compensation if one spouse has already repaid a joint obligation with their own funds. The question of debts may also be considered separately from the division of assets, as an independent subject of dispute.
Separately about suretyship. If one spouse acted as a surety for someone else’s loan, this is that spouse’s personal obligation, and it does not become joint merely because of the marriage. Likewise, a debt that arose before the registration of the marriage remains personal regardless of how many years the spouses lived together. That is why the date the obligation arose should always be checked first: it often immediately settles the question of whether the debt is joint.
In practice, spouses most often reach an agreement: whoever keeps, for example, a mortgaged apartment also continues to service the loan. Such arrangements should be recorded in writing rather than orally. If you are divorcing amicably, it is convenient to arrange everything at once; we write about this in the article on dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. But if there is a dispute over property and debts, it is resolved within the property division case.
The enforcement officer first directs enforcement at the debtor’s personal property and at their share in joint property, not at your property.
The mechanism looks like this. The enforcement officer opens proceedings on the basis of an enforcement document, searches for the debtor’s assets, and seizes them. If personal property is not enough to repay the debt, the claimant may apply to the court to determine and allocate the debtor’s share in joint property in order to direct enforcement precisely at it. This possibility is based on Article 371 of the Civil Code and Article 73 of the Family Code. That is, a jointly owned apartment is not sold in full for a personal debt of one spouse: first the debtor’s share must be determined.
If your personal property, or property that does not belong to the debtor at all, has been mistakenly seized, you have the right to protect yourself: file a claim for recognition of ownership and for the release of the property from seizure, that is, its exclusion from the inventory. This is precisely why it is critically important for a debtor’s spouse to have documents confirming the personal character of their property: gift agreements, certificates of the right to inheritance, evidence of acquisition with personal or premarital funds.
You can protect property with legal instruments that record in advance what belongs to you personally and what is joint.
The most effective of them are as follows. First, a marriage contract: it can be concluded both before the registration of the marriage and at any time during it. The contract determines which property is personal, how assets are divided, and, if desired, how debts are allocated too. Second, an agreement on the division of joint property or on the allocation of a share, notarized: it gives each person a clear, separately formalized item of property. Third, keeping evidence of the personal character of property under Article 57 of the Family Code: documents on gifting, inheritance, premarital acquisition. Fourth, timely and good-faith division of property, when both parties act openly. An important caveat: all these steps must be genuine and not aimed at defrauding creditors, otherwise they will not work.
No. An attempt to withdraw property from enforcement through a sham division or a sham divorce is very risky and most often futile.
Ukrainian courts actively apply the doctrine of the fraudulent transaction: an agreement that a debtor concluded to the detriment of a creditor, in particular a division, gift, or sale of property to a close person on the eve of enforcement, may be declared invalid. Moreover, even the fact that the transaction was actually performed does not save it from being recognized as fraudulent. A sham divorce for the sake of saving property also has its own risks and legal consequences, which we describe in detail in the article on recognizing a divorce as fictitious. Instead of dubious schemes, it is safer to build a lawful protection of property and, if necessary, agree with the creditor on restructuring the debt.
Start with an inventory: draw up a complete list of assets and debts and determine the legal nature of each obligation.
Then act consistently. Step one: gather the documents for each debt, namely the agreement, the payment schedule, the purpose of the funds, and the date the obligation arose. Step two: distinguish personal and joint debts and property, relying on Articles 57, 60, 65, and 73 of the Family Code. Step three: choose the route of divorce. If there are no common minor children and there is mutual consent, divorce is possible through DRATS; in other cases, through the court. We gave a general overview of both routes in the article on the divorce procedure in Ukraine. Step four: agree on the fate of joint debts and assets in writing or through the court within the property division. Step five: prepare the documents and, if necessary, the statement of claim; how to do this is shown in the guide on how to file a statement of claim for dissolution of marriage. The court fee for such a claim in 2026 is about UAH 1,331, which equals 0.4 of the subsistence minimum for able-bodied persons (UAH 3,328 from 1 January 2026); for electronic filing through the E-Court a discount is generally provided. Step six and the most important: consult an attorney before signing any agreements on debts or property, because correcting mistaken arrangements later is much more difficult.
It will not pass on its own. If you did not sign the credit agreement and were not a surety, the bank cannot demand payment from you until a court recognizes the debt as joint and taken in the interests of the family.
As a general rule, no. Without evidence that the money was taken in the interests of the family and used for its needs, such a debt is considered the personal obligation of the person who took it out.
For a personal debt of the other spouse, enforcement may be directed only at their property and their share in joint ownership. Your share is protected. An exception is possible only if the court recognizes the debt as joint and taken in the interests of the family.
The person who signed the credit agreement is liable to the bank, or both of you if you are co-borrowers. Divorce does not change the terms of the loan. The question of who actually pays going forward should be settled by a property division agreement.
Yes. The question of joint debts may be considered as an independent subject of dispute, even if the property has already been divided. The main thing is to prove the joint character of the obligation.
No. Arrears in paying alimony are the personal obligation of the payer and do not pass to the other spouse. We describe the procedure for recovery in the article on the recovery of alimony.
No. The court may declare the disposal of property to the detriment of a creditor invalid as a fraudulent transaction. Such a step can only worsen your position and will not protect the property.
The court fee for a divorce claim is about UAH 1,331. If the divorce takes place through DRATS by consent and without common minor children, the state duty is about UAH 8.50. The division of property and debts is paid for separately, depending on the value of the claim.
Ilona MelnychukAttorney, Lexon law firmSpecializes in family, civil, and commercial cases. Over 15 years of practice: representing clients’ interests in courts and negotiations.Author: Ilona Melnychuk, attorney In Brief You can dissolve a marriage through the registry office (DRATS, the body for the state registration of civil status
The “Lexon” attorney secured the complete cancellation of a resolution imposing a fine under part 2 of Article 122 of the Code of Ukraine on
It happens more often than it seems: one day you suddenly find out about the existence of a court decision issued in a case you
Grand changes await the Ukrainian business environment. As of August 28, 2025, the Commercial Code of Ukraine loses its force. This is not just a
Buying real estate is always a serious step that requires not only significant financial investment, but also thorough legal verification. To avoid unpleasant surprises, it
Buying real estate has always been a responsible step, and in the conditions of 2025, when economic instability and wartime risks intensify fraudulent schemes, it
