The Court of Cassation, in the decision under consideration, rejects the request, brought by the former spouse, to obtain the divorce allowance. The decision is in line with the well-established case law according to which the short duration of the marriage may justify the reduction and even the forfeiting of the divorce allowance, since, in a short marriage, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find an effective contribution made by the former spouse to family life. In the present case, the judges consider, on the one hand, that the imbalance between the economic conditions of the former partners existed already before the (very short) marriage and was not determined by common choices in the direction of family life; on the other hand, that the plaintiff is not in a situation of objective impossibility of obtaining adequate means, in light of her young age and the absence of pathologies affecting her ability to work. The ruling provides an opportunity to assess, within the scope of all the functions of the divorce allowance, what is the most appropriate balance between the need for relief from the duties of post-marital solidarity and the lawful demands for protection of the economically- weak former spouse.
La Corte di cassazione, nella decisione in commento, rigetta il ricorso proposto dall’ex coniuge avverso il mancato riconoscimento dell’assegno di divorzio. L’ordinanza si inserisce nel consolidato orientamento secondo il quale la breve durata del matrimonio può giustificare la riduzione dell'assegno divorzile fino ad azzerarlo, dal momento che, in un matrimonio effimero, è difficile, se non impossibile, riscontrare un rilevante contributo endofamiliare fornito dall’ex coniuge nella fisiologia del rapporto. Nella fattispecie, i giudici rilevano, da un lato, che lo squilibrio tra le condizioni economiche degli ex partners sussisteva già da prima del (brevissimo) matrimonio e non è stato determinato da scelte comuni di indirizzo della vita familiare e, dall’altro, che la richiedente non versa nell’oggettiva impossibilità di procurarsi mezzi adeguati stante la sua giovane età e l’assenza di patologie incidenti sulla sua capacità lavorativa. La pronuncia offre l’occasione per valutare, in simili casi, nell’ambito di tutte le funzioni proprie dell’assegno di divorzio, quale sia il più corretto bilanciamento tra l’esigenza di un alleggerimento dei doveri di solidarietà post-coniugale e le istanze di tutela dell’ex coniuge economicamente debole.
Carlo Basunti (2024). Matrimonio effimero e riflessi sull'assegno di divorzio. FAMIGLIA E DIRITTO, 4, 382-393.
Matrimonio effimero e riflessi sull'assegno di divorzio
Carlo Basunti
2024
Abstract
The Court of Cassation, in the decision under consideration, rejects the request, brought by the former spouse, to obtain the divorce allowance. The decision is in line with the well-established case law according to which the short duration of the marriage may justify the reduction and even the forfeiting of the divorce allowance, since, in a short marriage, it is difficult, if not impossible, to find an effective contribution made by the former spouse to family life. In the present case, the judges consider, on the one hand, that the imbalance between the economic conditions of the former partners existed already before the (very short) marriage and was not determined by common choices in the direction of family life; on the other hand, that the plaintiff is not in a situation of objective impossibility of obtaining adequate means, in light of her young age and the absence of pathologies affecting her ability to work. The ruling provides an opportunity to assess, within the scope of all the functions of the divorce allowance, what is the most appropriate balance between the need for relief from the duties of post-marital solidarity and the lawful demands for protection of the economically- weak former spouse.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.