Shrnutí: Divorce with minor children in 2026 is no longer the same as it used to be. As a rule, divorce proceedings and proceedings for the adjustment of the child’s circumstances are now combined into one proceeding. The court does not only decide with whom the child will live, but the entire future regime: custody, maintenance and, if necessary, contact with the other parent. The main criterion is not the convenience of the parents, but the best interests of the child.
Quick overview
If you have a minor child together, the court today usually handles divorce and child custody arrangements together. The quickest route is through a parental agreement, but even that will not be automatically approved by the court unless it is in the best interests of the child. The court may award custody, alternate custody or joint custody to one parent; it usually also deals with child support and, if necessary, access. The OSPOD does not act as a “representative of one of the parents” in the proceedings, but as the child’s conflict guardian, i.e. the entity defending the child’s interests.
Until recently, it was the case that the children were decided separately first and then the divorce. However, as of 1 January 2026, the law has changed: if the spouses have a minor child in common, the divorce proceedings are joined with the proceedings on the child’s post-divorce arrangements, unless the court of first instance has already decided on the child on the merits or the joinder is not appropriate and the court excludes a matter for separate proceedings.
In practice, this mainly means fewer formal steps and more pressure to resolve the child’s situation as quickly and clearly as possible. However, it is still the case that without resolving the child’s circumstances, the court will not “just set aside” the divorce. For parents with minor children, the child is the focus of the proceedings, not an appendix.
We will walk you through the whole process step-by-step from filing to court approval. Will will also ensure the best possible settlement for you, your children and your property. We proceed quickly, discretely and with experience. You may also pay after services are provided.
Today, the court no longer formally decides between “sole”, “alternate” and “joint” custody in the previous sense of these terms. From 1 January 2026, the Civil Code assumes that the court will first determine how each parent will care for the child in future. If the parents agree, the court may decide that the child remains in the custody of both parents without determining in detail the extent of each parent’s custody. In the absence of such an agreement, the court shall determine the extent of each parent’s custody according to the best interests of the child. If necessary, it may also determine the specific conditions of custody.
In practice, this means that it is less a question of labelling a particular model and more a question of how custody should actually work in the child’s everyday life. The court can therefore set up a regime in which the child spends time with both parents in a relatively balanced way, but also a regime in which one parent cares more and the other less. The decisive factor is whether such an arrangement is stable, predictable and meets the needs of the particular child.
A typical example from practice: the parents live in the same town, both have cared for the child for a long time and, despite the partnership conflict, are able to deal with school, clubs and handovers in a substantive way. In such a situation, the court can set up a wider involvement of both parents in the custody. However, if the parents live far apart, the child is very young, the handover is regularly accompanied by conflicts, and the daily routine would be repeatedly disrupted, the court will usually determine the custody of each parent to make the environment as stable as possible for the child. What the regime will be called in common parlance is considerably less important than its actual operation.
Not always. If the court decides that the child remains in the custody of both parents by agreement, it does not have to detail the contact schedule at the same time. However, if the court determines the extent of each parent’s custody, it may also regulate, as appropriate, indirect contact between the parent and the child or the parent’s right to information about the child while the child is in the care of the other parent, and it may determine the terms of that contact. The law therefore assumes that access is not automatically regulated in every case in the same detail, but only when it is necessary in view of the specific situation of the child and the parents.
The court may regulate the scope of custody of each parent and, as appropriate, the rules of contact, information or other conditions that are necessary in the interests of the child.
The most common misconception parents make is that the court is looking for a “better parent”. In reality, it mainly looks at what is best for a particular child. This includes the child’s age, health, attachment to both parents and siblings, previous care arrangements, the stability of the environment, the ability of the parents to communicate with each other and the willingness of each parent to support the child’s relationship with the other parent. The best interests of the child must be the primary consideration.
Practical life also plays a major role. The court is interested in who takes the child to school, who deals with the doctor, home preparation, clubs or the day-to-day organisation of the day. It is not a question of ‘scoring points’, but of whether the proposed arrangements are related to the child’s real life. In the case of older and sufficiently mature children, the court will also take into account their views, and the way in which views are ascertained should be sensitive and appropriate to the age of the child. In addition, the proceedings shall be conducted with the participation of the OSPOD as the child’s conflict guardian.
In practice, this is particularly problematic where one parent frames the dispute as a battle to win. A parent who manipulates the child against the other parent, prevents contact without a reasonable reason or makes the child a mediator of the conflict is not helping himself or herself in court.
The Cochise Practice, sometimes referred to as the Cochise Model, is not a separate law or a mandatory practice for all courts. It is an approach based on rapid and interdisciplinary cooperation between the court, the OSPOD, mediators, counsellors, possibly lawyers and other professionals, with the aim of bringing parents to an agreement as quickly as possible in the best interests of the child. This model is used by some courts and institutions in various forms.
For parents, the main point is that the Cochem approach usually pushes for quick negotiations, personal involvement of the parents, substantive communication and an effort to find a workable parenting plan instead of a long struggle to “win”. Where parents are capable of at least minimal cooperation, this often works better than the classic protracted litigation.
Tip: Read how divorce proceedings in court work when it comes to marriages with minor children.
Child support is handled by the court along with child custody. In addition, since 2026, it has been expressly provided that when the court decides on the child’s circumstances for the period after the divorce and decides on custody pursuant to Section 907 of the Civil Code, it shall always also decide on the child support obligation at the same time; it may approve the parents’ agreement if it is not manifestly contrary to the best interests of the child.
Maintenance is not determined solely by the income of the obligor parent. The court shall assess the needs of the child, the means and earning capacity of both parents, the extent of personal care and the standard of living of the family. Thus, in the case of alternate custody, it is not automatic that maintenance is not determined. If one parent earns considerably more or bears a smaller part of the current expenses, the court may determine maintenance even in the case of alternate custody. Conversely, in other cases, it may find that each parent pays for the child’s needs directly during his or her custody time.
A typical example: a child is in alternating custody, but one parent has several times the income and the other pays most of the school and medical expenses. Here too, maintenance may be appropriate, because the child should share in the standard of living of both parents, not just the parent with whom he or she is currently staying.
In a divorce with minor children, the court today generally handles the divorce and the future arrangement of the child’s affairs in one proceeding. It decides on custody, maintenance and, where appropriate, access. The parents’ agreement is usually the best way forward, but only if it truly protects the child’s interests and is not just a formal compromise between the adults. The court looks mainly at stability, security, past care and the ability of the parents to function so that the child does not have to bear the consequences of their conflict.
Typically when there is an agreement between the parents and there is no need for a detailed court regime. However, if the parents cannot set up the child’s contact themselves or the relationship is in conflict, the court will adjust the contact.
Not one. The OSPOD acts as the child’s conflict guardian in these proceedings and defends the child’s interests.
The court may take this into account significantly when making its decision. The support of the child’s relationship with the other parent is an important criterion, and unreasonable obstruction of contact may prejudice the parent in the proceedings. In general, contact is a right of the child and the parent and, in certain situations, a duty of the parent.
It’s not. It is an approach based on the rapid collaboration of professionals and the support of parental agreement. Some courts use it, others do not or only partially.
We will walk you through the whole process step-by-step from filing to court approval. Will will also ensure the best possible settlement for you, your children and your property. We proceed quickly, discretely and with experience. You may also pay after services are provided.
Lucie understands the legal profession like few others, and she defends the interests of her clients both inside and outside the courtroom. Lucie has won hundreds of disputes, and her role on our team is to ensure the smooth and effiecient transfer of real properties. She is also experienced in both civil law and family law.
Lucie understands the legal profession like few others, and she defends the interests of her clients both inside and outside the courtroom. Lucie has won hundreds of disputes, and her role on our team is to ensure the smooth and effiecient transfer of real properties. She is also experienced in both civil law and family law.
We’ll review your case and suggest how to resolve it for CZK 690.
In person and online. Just choose the appropriate service or opt for an independent consultation when you are unsure.
