The father's absence in the children's life raises the maintenance allowance

The absence of the father in the daughters' lives has a significant weight in the determination of the maintenance allowance. The Court of Cassation recalls that the "absence"of the parentin the daily life of the children is also paid economically, because it affects the definition of the amount to be paid. A few days after the verdict that affirmed the separated father's right to obtain the cut of an allowance too onerous for him, the Supreme Court now recalls that parents both have an obligation to be affectively close to their children. And not to do so may cause the allowance in their favour to rise. Obviously everything must be balanced - in compliance with the principle of proportionality - with the possibilities of the more 'absconding' parent - specifically the father - with those of the ex-spouse.

The Court of Cassation thus dismissed the appeal against the Court's decision, upheld on appeal, to set at the father's expense a monthly quota of 1,600 euro for two daughters, one of whom aged but not yet self-sufficient, in addition to 60% of extraordinary expenses. For the ex-wife an equalisation-compensation cheque of EUR 300. The decision was influenced by the economic gap with the former spouse, who could count on an income of 1380 euro per month and the ownership of some real estate (including the family home), compared to the ex-husband's salary of 3,100 euro.

It was not enough to change the judges' minds that the plaintiff paid a rent that, combined with the outlay for his daughters, almost reduced his salary to zero, given that he had movable assets in excess of one million euro.

The woman had on her side the decision, shared by her then-husband, to give up a full-time job, transformed into part-time to care for their daughters when they were one and three years old. But in the account, the legitimacy judges also put a reduced presence in the family of the man both during the marriage - also due to a commitment as a sports judge that joined his activity - and after the separation. For the Supreme Court, in determining the allowance, it must be considered that the father never provided direct support for the girls, because they refused to meet him. This closure of relations with the father was attributable to the latter's behaviour, which was affectively distant even at certain parties.

The defence's line of argument, which had emphasised that the woman's choice of part-time employment was not irreversible and recalled that she had come into possession of approximately 70,000 euro contained in a joint account, did not pass. The Supreme Court values the daughters' right to be educated and morally assisted by both mother and father. The latter task was not sufficiently performed by the applicant.