Family law tasks

Task 1.

N.P. In the final stages of her pregnancy, Gruzdeva decided to go to the neighboring region to visit her mother in order to, with her help, provide proper care for the child after the birth. On the train, Gruzdeva felt unwell, which resulted in premature birth. The doctor who was in the carriage was able to provide her with the necessary assistance in a timely manner; the birth took place safely; upon arrival at the place, the carriage conductor and the doctor drew up a certificate of the birth of the child, which was handed over to Gruzdeva. A week after Gruzdeva’s arrival, her mother handed over this certificate and her daughter’s application to register the child’s birth to the local registry office. However, the head of the registry office considered the submitted documents insufficient for state registration of the child’s birth, proposing to additionally issue a birth certificate signed by the head of the passenger train and four witnesses. Gruzdeva’s mother considered such a requirement unnecessary and filed a complaint against the actions of the head of the registry office with the city administration.
Are the demands of the head of the registry office legitimate?
Did the train conductor have the right to sign the child’s birth certificate?
What are the grounds for state registration of the birth of children born en route by rail, sea, or air transport?
What decision should be made on Gruzdeva’s mother’s complaint?

Problem 2

Citizens Timofeeva and Demidov lived together and ran a common household without registering their marriage for several years. Then a conflict arose between them, the relationship went wrong and they began to live separately. After some time, Timofeeva filed a lawsuit for the division of jointly acquired property (land, TV, refrigerator, furniture, VCR). The rules of which branch of law can be applied by the court when resolving this dispute and why?

Problem 3

In the statement of claim for the division of common property I.K. When listing it, Sudakov indicated the VCR and Sony TV sold without his written consent by his ex-wife a year before the divorce, as well as securities - shares of the Savings Bank. In this regard, he demanded that these sales transactions be declared invalid and that the amount received by the wife from the sale of equipment and shares be included in the total value of the property subject to division. During the consideration of the case, the court found that the VCR, television and securities were indeed sold to Sudakova, and she used the proceeds for the needs of the family: payment for additional lessons for her daughter with tutors and renovation of the apartment. Sudakov himself obviously knew about the transactions made by his wife, but was indifferent to this fact, remembering it only after the divorce during the division of common property.
How should the court resolve Sudakov´s claim?
What are the grounds necessary for the court to recognize as invalid a transaction made by one of the spouses to dispose of common property?
In what form must a spouse’s consent be expressed for a transaction to dispose of common property by the other spouse?