The Court of Cassation, in the decision under consideration, rejects the request, brought by the former spouse, to obtain the divorce allowance. The S.C. places at the basis of its ruling, the innovation ush-ered in by the judgment 18287/2018 of the Joint Sections which, as it is well known, provided for a fun-damental reinterpretation of Article 5(6) of the Divorce Act, assigning to the divorce allowance both a support and, in equal measure, a compensatory and equalizing function. In the present case, the judges appreciate, on the one hand, the absence of a situation of economic non self-sufficiency of the ex wife and, on the other hand, the non-effective contribution made by the woman to family life. In this respect, it is highlighted that the former spouse had made her work-related decisions not to dedicate herself to the care of the family. Thus, even if there is an economic imbalance between the two former spouses, the payment of a divorce allowance is not granted as there is no existential frustration of the plaintiff.
La Corte di cassazione, nella decisione in esame, rigetta il ricorso proposto dall’ex coniuge avverso il mancato riconoscimento dell’assegno di divorzio. La S.C. pone alla base della pronuncia, l’insegnamento delle Sezioni Unite del 2018 che, come è noto, hanno operato una fondamentale rilettura dell’art. 5, comma 6, l. div., riconoscendo sia una funzione assistenziale sia perequativo-compensativa all’assegno. Nella fattispecie, i giudici valutano, da un lato, l’insussistenza di una situazione di non auto-sufficienza economica della donna e, dall’altro, si concentrano sull’effettività del contributo endofamiliare prestato da quest’ultima. A tal riguardo, viene sottolineato come l’ex coniuge avesse operato liberamente le sue scelte lavorative, per ragioni personali e non dirette alla cura della famiglia. Dunque, pur in presenza di uno squilibrio economico tra gli ex partners, non può trovare giustificazione la corresponsione di un assegno di divorzio non essendovi una frustrazione della richiedente sotto il profilo esistenziale.
Carlo Basunti (2023). L'assegno di divorzio e la valutazione del contributo endofamiliare. FAMIGLIA E DIRITTO, 6, 561-569.
L'assegno di divorzio e la valutazione del contributo endofamiliare
Carlo Basunti
2023
Abstract
The Court of Cassation, in the decision under consideration, rejects the request, brought by the former spouse, to obtain the divorce allowance. The S.C. places at the basis of its ruling, the innovation ush-ered in by the judgment 18287/2018 of the Joint Sections which, as it is well known, provided for a fun-damental reinterpretation of Article 5(6) of the Divorce Act, assigning to the divorce allowance both a support and, in equal measure, a compensatory and equalizing function. In the present case, the judges appreciate, on the one hand, the absence of a situation of economic non self-sufficiency of the ex wife and, on the other hand, the non-effective contribution made by the woman to family life. In this respect, it is highlighted that the former spouse had made her work-related decisions not to dedicate herself to the care of the family. Thus, even if there is an economic imbalance between the two former spouses, the payment of a divorce allowance is not granted as there is no existential frustration of the plaintiff.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Assegno di divorzio.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipo:
Versione (PDF) editoriale
Licenza:
Licenza per accesso riservato
Dimensione
1.39 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.39 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.