guardians) and the body of guardianship and
custody.
Thus, in a significant number of cases, the
exercise of the depositor’s rights by a minor is
complicated by control not only by the parents
(adoptive parents, guardians), but also by the
guardianship authority and guardian. Given the
various factors in the functioning of such a
mechanism (for example, the lack of a clear list
of cases where the guardianship authority may
refuse to give consent, uncertainty of
requirements, and sometimes delays in
considering this issue), control of property
management of a child who is not deprived of
parental care and is not an orphan, it should be
recognized that it is necessary to conceptually
partially change the legal regulation of deposit
relations with the participation of a minor
depositor. For example, the German Civil Code
(BGB) (Federal Ministry of Justice, n/d) contains
different approaches to the disposal of a minor's
contribution depending on whether the child is
cared for by a parent or guardian (if the child is
deprived of parental care or is an orphan). Thus,
according to section 1666, if the child’s physical,
mental or spiritual health or property is exposed
to a risk of improper parental care, neglect of the
child, the conduct of a third party or the fact that
the parents are not to blame cope with their
responsibilities, the family court must take the
necessary measures to eliminate this risk, as
parents are unwilling or unable to eliminate it.
According to section 1667, the family court may
decide that the child's money must be invested in
a certain way and his permission is required to
withdraw it from the accounts. Therefore, such
measures are taken by the court only in case of
threat to the goods (in particular, property) of the
child. Section 1809 is also provided, that the
guardian should invest money held in trust for a
ward under section 1807 (1) no. 5 only subject to
the provision that the approval of the supervisory
guardian or of the family court is required for the
collection of the money. Such restrictions do not
apply in the case of exemption from guardianship
provided for in section 1852. It seems
appropriate to borrow foreign experience and,
given the peculiarities of the contractual
regulation of deposit relations, to optimize the
conditions of participation of minors. In
particular, Part 3 of Art. 32 of the Civil Code of
Ukraine to read as follows: “3. A minor may
dispose of cash means deposited by other persons
to the financial institution to his/her favor by the
consent of parents (adoptive parents) or
guardians. The guardianship authority may
decide that the child’s permission is required to
withdraw money from the child’s accounts.”
Also Art. 1063 of the Civil Code of Ukraine
should be supplemented by part 3 of the
following content: “A minor in whose favor the
bank deposit agreement is concluded has the
right to acquire the rights of the depositor
independently. The contract may stipulate that
the withdrawal of money from the account in full
or in part before the expiration of the contract by
such a minor requires the permission of a
guardianship and trusteeship body.” Credit
services are also of interest to minors as
consumers. In the Law of Ukraine of 15.11.2016
“On consumer lending” the consumer is
understood as an individual who has entered into
or intends to enter into a consumer credit
agreement. As the special legislation does not
contain additional requirements for such a
natural person, the general provisions on the
scope of legal capacity of a minor apply. This is
confirmed by litigation practice. Thus, the
mother of a minor applied to the “Consumer
Center” LLC with a claim to invalidate the loan
agreement (Case No. 161/7810/19, 2019). She
substantiated her claims by the fact that on
January 10, 2019, a loan agreement
No.10.01.2019-100005143 in the amount of
UAH 3,000 was concluded between her daughter
and Consumer Center LLC with a maturity date
to January 23, 2019, including the payment of
interest on the loan in the amount of UAH 840,
which is 28% for 14 days of the loan. She
considers that this agreement is invalid on the
grounds that at the time of concluding the
agreement her daughter was a minor and lived
with her, was dependent on her. She also stated
that she did not approve her daughter committing
the transaction. The court decided to satisfy the
claim, arguing that the commission of other
minors, not provided for in Articles 31, 32 of the
Civil Code of Ukraine, requires the consent of
parents or guardians. At the same time, the
mother did not give her consent to the conclusion
of the loan agreement dated January 10, 2019. At
the same time, the case file does not contain any
evidence that she would have given such consent
or subsequent approval of the transaction.
At the same time, the reference of the Consumer
Center LLC to the fact that the conclusion
between the parties to the disputed loan
agreement does not go beyond a small household
transaction was critically assessed by the court.
According to the case file and the defendant
points out, the minor received a loan in the
amount of UAH 3,000. Also, taking into account
the interest rate for the use of credit funds, as well
as the complexity of the content of credit
relations, including the consequences of default
or improper performance by the borrower of its