Divorce Allowance: Commentary on Judgment Cass. civ., Sec. I, Ord. no. 24930 of 2024
The recent order of the Court of Cassation no. 24930 of September 17, 2024, offers significant insights into the issue of divorce allowance, particularly regarding the analysis of the economic conditions of the parties involved. The legal case pitted two former partners of a civil union, A.A. and B.B., against each other, with the Court reiterating the importance of evidence and specific circumstances in requests for maintenance.
The Case Under Review
The Court of Pisa had initially established a monthly contribution for the maintenance of A.A. to be paid by B.B., but the Court of Appeal of Florence, on appeal, decided to revoke the allowance, deeming that the necessary prerequisites were not met. This step is crucial as it highlights how the assessment of the parties' economic conditions is decisive for the granting of maintenance.
The Court of Cassation confirmed that maintenance allowance requires the ascertainment of the inadequacy of the former partner's means, applying equitable criteria defined by current legislation.
Legal Principles Involved
- Article 5, paragraph 6, of Law no. 898/1970, which governs maintenance in the case of civil unions.
- Article 132, paragraph 4, of the Code of Civil Procedure, concerning the reasoning of judgments.
- Case law of the Court of Cassation, which emphasizes the importance of an accurate assessment of evidence.
The Court of Cassation reiterated that maintenance allowance has an assistive and compensatory function, requiring a comparison between the economic conditions of both partners. In the specific case, A.A. failed to demonstrate the inadequacy of her means, nor the impossibility of acquiring them.
Conclusions
The judgment under review offers important indications on how courts must proceed in assessing requests for divorce allowance. The need to provide concrete evidence of one's economic conditions and the ability to demonstrate the inadequacy of the requested means are fundamental aspects for the granting of an allowance. This decision therefore represents a call for adequate documentation and rigorous assessment by judges, to protect the rights of both parties involved.
