by Admin2 | Apr 4, 2022 | news-en
Pursuant to Art. 135 § 1 of the Act of February 25, 1964 - Family and Guardianship Code: "the scope of maintenance depends on the justified needs of the entitled person and the economic and financial possibilities of the obligee".
The Provincial Administrative Court in Gorzów Wielkopolski in its judgment of March 31, 2021 issued in the case number II SA / Go 157/21 referred to this provision and ruled that it was not possible to arbitrarily impose a maintenance obligation on a given person without prior, precise verification of its "economic and financial possibilities" referred to in Art. 135 § 1 k.r.o. According to the Provincial Administrative Court, it should be checked whether the potential obligated person has any life limitations that could hinder the proper care of the entitled person.
by Admin2 | Mar 1, 2022 | news-en
A recourse claim is a pecuniary claim, but not a maintenance claim. It does not use the provisions concerning, inter alia, enforcement of maintenance payments. The substantive and procedural rules relating to the privileging of maintenance claims do not apply to him.
Recourse claims are not maintenance claims, but can be treated as already fulfilled maintenance. As a rule, however, alimony is intended to meet current needs. Maintenance for the past period is awarded exceptionally in the case in which there are unmet needs of the child from the past period, or as a result of satisfying these needs a debt was incurred to cover the justified needs of the child.
Pursuant to Art. 140 par. 1 of the Family and Guardianship Code, a person who provides another means of subsistence or upbringing without being obliged to do so or being obliged to obtain timely maintenance from the obligated person in a closer or the same order would be impossible for the entitled person or associated with excessive difficulties, may request reimbursement from the person who should have fulfilled these benefits.
It is therefore possible to demand from the person obliged to provide the means of subsistence or upbringing the reimbursement of costs incurred by the person entitled to maintenance. It is not necessary that there has been a prior decision determining the extent of the maintenance obligation. The court will determine its amount in the process of reimbursement of the said costs. It should be noted, however, that the amount of the reimbursement is directly related not only to the justified needs of the entitled party, but also to the property and earning capacity of the obligee. This means that the amount allocated to the current needs of the child may be too high, taking into account the financial capacity of the debtor. In this case, the reimbursement will not cover the entirety of the funds allocated to the child's maintenance.
Recourse claims expire after three years.
by Admin2 | Feb 1, 2022 | news-en
In the judgment of June 30, 2021, the Supreme Court recalled that "even a difficult financial situation of a parent does not release him from the obligation to provide child support. The parent is obliged to share even a very meager income with the child. On the other hand, in extreme situations, satisfying the needs of minor children may even take place at the expense of some assets. " This means that the court may order maintenance even from a parent who does not earn any income, forcing him to sell the property. Of course, this cannot lead to the parent's living standard falling below that of the child.
by Admin2 | Jan 3, 2022 | news-en
Pursuant to Art. 60 § 3 of the Polish Family and Guardianship Code, the maintenance obligation towards the former spouse shall expire in the event of the contracting of a new marriage by that spouse. Therefore, the Supreme Court in the judgment of 10 July 1998 (I CKN 788/97) had to rule that if the former spouse did not formalize a new relationship, the maintenance obligation still exists. Staying in cohabitation by a divorced spouse entitled to alimony is not a statutory condition for the expiry of the maintenance obligation towards him by the other divorced spouse.
by Admin2 | Dec 1, 2021 | news-en
In the judgment of December 2, 2020 (IV KK 706/19), the Supreme Court rightly recalled that "apart from the amount of income earned by the accused and his earning potential, from the perspective of assessing whether the accused fulfilled the features of a prohibited act under Art. 209 § 1a of the CC in connection with from § 1 of the CC and any further findings as to the degree of social harmfulness of this act, the amount and nature of the financial obligations incumbent on him is also of key importance, including in particular those subject to enforcement proceedings, as well as the degree to which the accused fulfilled these obligations and his efforts in in this respect "
This ruling was issued in a case in which the accused could not fulfill his maintenance obligation due to bailiff seizures.
by Admin2 | Nov 1, 2021 | news-en
The Court of Appeal in Kraków, in its judgment of June 15, 2021, rightly pointed out that if, after the divorce judgment was issued by the court of first instance, there was a change in the so-called relations within the meaning of Art. 138 k.r.o. it is the court of second instance that may change this alimony. This is so because "in a divorce case, the decision on the maintenance obligation of divorcing parents towards their minor children applies to benefits from the date of the validity of this judgment."
