In October last year, the FBRC editorial team covered the controversial paternity case and inheritance, which received diametrically opposed rulings in the Atyrau City and Regional Courts.
As it turned out, this story contains far more contentious points than initially appeared.
First, let us briefly recap the circumstances of the case.
After the father's death, his only daughter inherited the property. Shortly after the funeral, a man appeared claiming to be the deceased's illegitimate son and demanding a share of the inheritance. During the court proceedings, a molecular genetic examination was conducted, taking biological samples from the alleged brother and sister.
The test results, which confirmed the familial relationship, received opposing interpretations at different judicial levels. The City Court, presided over by G.A. Kazhgalieva, dismissed the claim of the alleged son due to the absence of samples from the deceased.
However, in September 2023, the Regional Court overturned this decision, recognising the claimant as the deceased's son based on the aforementioned examination. The deceased's daughter attempted to challenge the ruling in the Supreme Court, but her appeal was rejected, as the Regional Court's conclusion was deemed justified.
According to information from an FBRC source, two fundamental requirements were violated during the key molecular genetic examination. Firstly, to reliably establish a biological relationship between a parent and child, genetic material from both parties is necessary. In this case, samples from the father were absent.
Significantly, in February 2023, the Supreme Court ruled in a similar case that an examination without the biological material of the alleged father was unreliable.
Secondly, the expert must answer two mandatory questions: regarding the existence of paternity and regarding the biological relationship between the alleged brother and sister. The case file only contains an answer to one of them – the indicator of biological connection between the brother and sister is 99.9982%. However, a direct answer to the key question regarding the establishment of paternity is absent.
Given the importance of accuracy and completeness of examinations in such cases, inconsistency in expert standards can undermine trust in the judicial system and call into question the fairness of the rulings made.
At the same time, insufficient accuracy and incompleteness of expert conclusions allow results to be interpreted differently, opening opportunities for manipulation.
To be continued...