One of the objections lodged against privatisation: a notarial refusal, negotiations or court proceedings

Privatisation is only possible with the written consent of all adult family members, including those who are temporarily absent (Article 8(2) of Law No. 2482-XII). Anyone who does not wish to be a co-owner must draw up a notarised declaration of withdrawal from the process — and this does not prevent the others from proceeding. If, however, a person has not lived in the flat for more than six months without valid reasons, they may be deemed to have forfeited their right of use through court proceedings — and the property may be privatised without their consent.

From 15 February 2026, Law No. 4751-IX ‘On the Basic Principles of Housing Policy’ will come into force, marking the end of free privatisation: Law No. 2482-XII will cease to have effect one year after the termination or repeal of martial law. Consequently, the ‘all for, one against’ conflict has evolved from a domestic dispute into a legal issue with a deadline: if it is not resolved in time, the flat will remain communal property — without the right to sell, gift or bequeath it.

In our experience, the ‘dissenter’ scenario encompasses three distinct situations, each requiring a different solution: a person who does not wish to become an owner; a person who has gone missing and has not been seen for years; or a person who lives in the flat and is deliberately blocking the process. Let’s examine each one.

Why consent is essential: what the law says

The transfer of occupied flats into joint shared or partial ownership requires the written consent of all adult family members who permanently reside in the flat, including those who are temporarily absent but retain the right to the accommodation (Part 2 of Article 8 of the Law of Ukraine ‘On the Privatisation of the State Housing Stock’ No. 2482-XII). For children aged between 14 and 18, the written, notarised consent of their parents or guardians is also required.

This is not a mere formality. Case law is consistent: privatisation carried out without the written consent of at least one adult family member is deemed invalid — the court will annul both the privatisation authority’s decision and the certificate of ownership. Therefore, ‘we’ll just submit the application without it’ is the worst possible strategy: even if the privatisation authority overlooks the breach, the outcome will remain vulnerable for years to come.

Situation 1. A person has no objection to the others, but does not wish to be an owner

This is the simplest case, which is often confused with a veto. A family member who does not wish to become a co-owner submits a declaration to a notary stating their refusal to participate in the privatisation. It is important for both parties to understand the consequences of such a refusal:

• the flat will be privatised by the remaining registered applicants — the refusing party’s share will be distributed amongst them;
• the refusing party retains the right to use the property — the new owner will not be able to evict them without good cause;
• the person’s right to free privatisation does not ‘lapse’ — they will be able to use it in relation to other state or council housing whilst Law No. 2482-XII remains in force;
• the waiver must be notarised — a handwritten note will not be accepted by the privatisation authority.

The cost of a notarised declaration ranges from 500 to 1,500 UAH, depending on the notary. Often, the dispute is resolved once these specific consequences are explained to the person: they fear ‘losing the roof over their head’, but in reality they lose nothing.

Situation 2. The registered occupant has gone missing and cannot be contacted

If a person is registered at an address but has not actually lived there for a long time, Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code apply — and this is an important nuance for 2026: despite the repeal of the Housing Code of the Ukrainian SSR by Law No. 4751-IX, Articles 71 and 72 remain in force until the Unified Information and Analytical Housing System becomes operational.

Under Article 71 of the Housing Code, a dwelling is retained for a temporarily absent tenant or a member of their family for a period of six months. If a person is absent for more than six months without valid reasons, following a claim by the landlord or other family members, they may be deemed to have lost the right to use the residential premises (Article 72 of the Housing Code) — through court proceedings.

What we must prove in court: the fact of non-residence (reports from the housing and utilities office or the property manager, neighbours’ testimonies, non-payment of utility bills, evidence of the person’s actual place of residence) and the absence of valid reasons. The court recognises, in particular, medical treatment, caring for a sick relative, military service, work in another city, and, from 2022, relocation due to hostilities as valid reasons; therefore, each case is assessed on an individual basis. Once the decision becomes final, the person is removed from the register — and their consent to privatisation is no longer required.

The court fee for such a non-property claim by an individual in 2026 is 1,331.20 UAH (0.4 times the minimum subsistence level of 3,328 UAH); in practice, proceedings at first instance take 4–8 months.

Situation 3. A person lives in the flat and is blocking privatisation

This is the most complex scenario, and honesty is key here: it is impossible to force a person who permanently resides in the flat to give their consent. Neither the court nor the privatisation authority can override their free will. A claim to ‘compel them to give consent’ has no prospect of success.

What works in practice:

• negotiations with a solicitor acting as a mediator — most often, a person blocks the process out of fear of losing their home or due to a dispute over future shares, and written guarantees (a notarised statement, an agreement between family members on the terms of use) remove the block;
• verifying whether the person is actually entitled to the property — it sometimes happens that the ‘blocker’ is only formally registered and has long been living at a different address, in which case scenario 2 applies;
• waiting for circumstances to change — with the understanding that the deadline under Law No. 4751-IX works against all residents simultaneously, and this should be explicitly addressed during negotiations.

Comparison of the three approaches

Option	Condition	Timeframe	Cost
Notarised waiver of ownership	The individual agrees not to be the owner	1 day	500–1,500 UAH (notary)
Court proceedings under Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code	The person has not been living there for more than 6 months without valid reasons	4–8 months + appeal	court fee of 1,331.20 UAH + legal assistance
Negotiations / mediation	The person is residing there and blocking the process	2 weeks – 3 months	legal advice and support

Common mistakes

• Submitting documents ‘without him’, hoping that the authority will not notice. The court will declare privatisation without consent invalid — along with the title deed.
• Obtaining a handwritten receipt from the person instead of a notarised waiver. The privatisation authority will not accept it, and time will be wasted.
• Deregistering ‘through acquaintances’ without going to court. The person will seek reinstatement through the courts and challenge the privatisation.
• Bringing a claim under Article 72 of the Housing Code against a person who is absent for valid reasons (military service, medical treatment, evacuation due to hostilities). The court will dismiss the claim, and family relations will be irreparably damaged.
• Forget about the children: residents aged 14–18 are involved in the privatisation, and they require notarised consent from their parents or guardians.

When a solicitor is not needed

If the ‘dissenting’ party simply does not wish to be an owner, it is sufficient to go to a notary together and formalise their withdrawal from the process. This takes an hour and costs up to 1,500 UAH. A solicitor is needed when a person has gone missing and court proceedings are required under Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code, when the conflict has reached an impasse and a negotiator with legal arguments is needed, or when the privatisation has already been carried out unlawfully and is being challenged.

 

Questions and answers

Is it possible to privatise a flat without the consent of one of the registered occupants?

No, if that person is of legal age, permanently resides in the flat and retains the right to the property. Either their notarised waiver of participation is required, or a court ruling that they have lost the right to use the property.

What is a notarised waiver of participation in privatisation?

A declaration by which an adult family member waives their right to acquire a share in the property, but does not object to privatisation by others. It is drawn up by a notary and costs 500–1,500 UAH. The person waiving their right retains the right to live in the flat.

Does the person waiving their right lose the right to privatisation in the future?

No. Waiving the right to participate in the privatisation of a specific flat does not constitute the exercise of the right to free privatisation — this right can be exercised in respect of other state-owned or council housing, provided that Law No. 2482-XII remains in force.

A relative is registered but has not lived in the flat for many years. What should be done?

File a claim to have them declared to have lost the right to use the dwelling, under Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code: if a person has been absent for more than 6 months without valid reasons, the court will remove them from the register, and consent to privatisation is no longer required.

Do Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code remain in force after the Housing Code is repealed in 2026?

Yes. Law No. 4751-IX repealed the Housing Code of the Ukrainian SSR, but left certain articles in force, including Articles 71 and 72 — these remain in force until the Unified Information and Analytical Housing System becomes operational.

What does the court consider to be valid reasons for absence?

Medical treatment, caring for a sick relative, military service, study or work in another city, as well as travel related to military operations. If there are valid reasons, it will not be possible to declare a person to have lost their right of use.

How much does a court case regarding the loss of the right of use cost, and how long does it take?

The court fee in 2026 is 1,331.20 UAH; if filed via the ‘Electronic Court’ system, it is 20 per cent less. The first instance takes 4–8 months; if the defendant lodges an appeal, add a further 3–6 months.

Can a person living in the flat be forced through the courts to give their consent?

No. Consent is a personal expression of will, and no court can replace it. For those who are living there and blocking the process, the only options are negotiation — or a change in circumstances.

What happens if privatisation goes ahead without the consent of one of the residents?

The person whose consent was ignored will challenge the privatisation in court — and the legal precedent here is unanimous: the privatisation authority’s order and the certificate of ownership will be declared invalid, and the procedure will have to be repeated.

Is a child’s consent required?

Minors participate in privatisation on an equal footing with adults. For children under 14, decisions are made by their parents, whilst for children aged 14–18, a written application is required, accompanied by the notarised consent of their parents or guardians.

Sources

• Law of Ukraine ‘On the Privatisation of the State Housing Stock’ No. 2482-XII, Articles 5 and 8 — zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2482-12
• Housing Code of Ukraine, Articles 71 and 72 (in force pursuant to the transitional provisions of Law No. 4751-IX) — zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5464-10
• Law of Ukraine ‘On the Basic Principles of Housing Policy’ No. 4751-IX — zakon.rada.gov.ua
• Law of Ukraine “On Court Fees” No. 3674-VI — zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3674-17

Resolving a privatisation dispute with the company ‘Svarog’

Please tell us who is registered at the flat and what exactly the disagreement is about — we will determine which of the three options is suitable for your case, prepare the notarised documents or a claim under Articles 71 and 72 of the Housing Code, and negotiate with your relatives in such a way as to preserve both the flat and your relationships. Related services: flat privatisation, legal representation, pre-litigation settlement of civil disputes, full price list.

+38 095 554-54-24 · Kyiv, 7 Khoriva Street, Office 2 (Podil) · Mon–Fri 9.00–18.00