The Court of Cassation on the revocation of divorce support: Order no. 26751 of 2024

The recent order of the Court of Cassation, no. 26751 of October 15, 2024, addresses a crucial issue in family law: the revocation of divorce support. In particular, the Court ruled on the appeal of A.A. who contested the decision of the Court of Appeal of Brescia, which had rejected the request for revocation of divorce support in favour of B.B. This article will analyse the salient points of the ruling and the significance of the decisions made by the Court.

The context of the case

A.A. requested the revocation of the monthly divorce support of 1,750 euros, claiming a change in his economic conditions and presenting evidence that would demonstrate the improved financial situation of his ex-wife, B.B. The Court of Appeal, however, rejected the request, holding that the appellant had not adequately proven the new facts that would justify the revocation.

The Court highlighted that the failure to admit the evidence requested by A.A. precluded the possibility of proving the new economic circumstances, which were essential for the decision.

Burden of proof and the Court's reasoning

A central aspect of the decision relates to the burden of proof. According to the Court, A.A. did not provide sufficient evidence to support his request. In particular, it was emphasised that the documentation presented did not clearly and concretely prove B.B.'s financial situation, despite the appellant's claims. The Court reiterated that it is up to the party requesting the revocation of the support to demonstrate significant changes in the parties' economic conditions.

• The consultation of the Revenue Agency did not provide sufficient evidence regarding B.B.'s assets.
• The evidentiary requests submitted by A.A. were deemed exploratory and therefore inadmissible.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Order no. 26751 of the Court of Cassation represents an important stance on the burden of proof in matters of divorce support. The Court clarified that the mere assertion of an improvement in financial status is not sufficient to justify the revocation of support without concrete and documented evidence. This decision underscores the need for a careful and rigorous assessment of the parties' economic conditions, highlighting the importance of evidence in judicial decisions.