Divorce and maintenance allowance: the Court of Cassation confirms the importance of res judicata (Cass. civ. n. 30545/2024)

The Court of Cassation, with ordinance no. 30545 of November 27, 2024, addressed the crucial issue concerning the divorce maintenance allowance, reiterating the principle that res judicata covers not only what was alleged but also what could have been alleged. The ruling is part of a legal context in which the stability of divorce decisions is fundamental to ensuring legal certainty.

The case examined by the Court of Cassation

In the case at hand, A.A. had requested the revocation of the divorce maintenance allowance charged to him, arguing that his ex-wife B.B. was cohabiting with another man, a circumstance that would have justified the termination of the maintenance obligation. However, the Court and subsequently the Court of Appeal of Venice had rejected the request, highlighting that the contested facts were already covered by res judicata.

• The appellant had already requested, in a previous proceeding, a reduction of the allowance without mentioning his ex-wife's cohabitation.
• The Court of Appeal emphasized that the request for revocation could not be based on circumstances already known or deducible in the previous judgment.

The principle that res judicata covers what was alleged and what could have been alleged also applies to disputes concerning the divorce maintenance allowance.

The principle of res judicata and its implications

The Court reiterated that divorce judgments, regarding economic relationships, become res judicata rebus sic stantibus. This means that once a right or obligation has been established, it cannot be re-examined based on facts prior to the judgment, unless a true novelty emerges.

Furthermore, the Judge clarified that the mere knowledge of an affective relationship does not equate to stable cohabitation, especially if there is no concrete evidence of such a change. This is crucial to prevent spouses from continuously re-examining decisions already made, creating uncertainty and instability in personal and financial relationships.

Conclusions

In conclusion, ordinance no. 30545 of the Court of Cassation represents an important confirmation of the stability of res judicata in divorce matters. The Court clarified that new claims must be based on facts that have actually occurred and not on situations already known, in order to protect the certainty of rights and duties post-divorce.