Supreme Court Grand Chamber Judge Mykola Himon uses luxury real estate and vehicles registered under his parents’ names, while his mother holds a Russian tax identification number and assets valued at over $1.3 million. This was revealed in a recent investigation into the wealth of the judge’s family, despite his previous recognition with the «Honor of the Week» award by the DEJURE Foundation.
Throughout his judicial career, Mykola Himon has declared free use of property owned by his parents. Since 2016, his declared assets have included a Honda CR-V, a flat in Dnipro, two apartments in Donetsk, and a house in Makiivka. Over time, the list expanded to include two Kyiv apartments worth 1.1 million and 2.5 million UAH, along with luxury premises in the mountain resort village of Polianytsia (Bukovel) valued at 5.1 million UAH.
In 2025, the judge’s mother transferred a 50% stake in one of the Kyiv apartments to his wife, with its reported value re-assessed at 7.3 million UAH. In total, the judge’s mother owns four apartments in elite residential complexes in Kyiv’s prestigious Pechersk district, where the judge currently resides.
According to public registries, the sole source of income funding these acquisitions is a small wholesale flower business operated by the judge’s mother, Tetiana Himon.
«According to the Supreme Court judge’s explanation, this small business enabled his mother to acquire four Pechersk apartments and Bukovel real estate. The total market value of these assets is estimated at $1.3 million,» the investigation notes.
Beyond the questionable origin of the family’s luxury real estate, investigators uncovered connections to the aggressor state. Tetiana Himon, a Mariupol native, was issued a Russian Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN 931001994495) in 2022 and appears in Russian state databases as a resident of the occupied territories.
Obtaining Russian documentation and registering with tax authorities in the Russian Federation indicates potential commercial activity and tax payments in temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine, raising concerns over the indirect financing of Russian military aggression.
Anti-corruption bodies and judicial ethics authorities are expected to review these findings regarding the Supreme Court judge.