Alimony for a spouse. Many people who decide to file for divorce fear that they will be obliged to support the other spouse. Such a situation may indeed take place, and the decisive factor is to determine who is to blame for the breakdown of the marriage. If it is established that the other spouse is solely responsible for the breakdown of the marriage, the situation is clarified. The provision of art. 60 of the Family and Guardianship Code (hereinafter referred to as cryo) implicitly follows that a spouse who is solely guilty of a breakup may not claim maintenance. It is for this reason that many people decide to divorce on the sole fault of the other spouse. Such a ruling in the divorce decree not only closes the way for the guilty spouse to claim maintenance, but also grants the innocent spouse a fairly broad right to seek maintenance for himself. Pursuant to Art. 60§1 cryo:
“If one of the spouses has been found solely guilty of the breakdown of the marriage, and the divorce entails a significant deterioration of the material situation of the innocent spouse, the court, at the request of the innocent spouse, may decide that the only spouse is obliged to contribute to an appropriate extent to the justified needs of the innocent spouse. even if this one was not in need. ”
Another benefit of obtaining a ruling declaring the other spouse’s sole fault is that his obligation to pay maintenance may be practically unlimited in time, unless the innocent spouse remarries (see 60 §3 cryo). On the other hand, it is irrelevant to the existence of the obligation to pay maintenance to the spouse is the contracting of a new marriage by the obligated person, this circumstance may at most have an impact on the amount of the maintenance obligation and can be raised in the case of reduction of maintenance (see the justification of the Supreme Court judgment of 1 July 2010, file reference number II CKN 1015/00.
The situation got more complicated when the Court ruled that both spouses were guilty of the breakdown of their marriage. In this case, maintenance may be claimed if it is shown that one of the spouses is in need. From the content of art. 60§1 of the cryo it follows that:
“A divorced spouse who has not been found solely guilty of the breakdown of the marriage and who is in need, may request the other divorced spouse to provide means of subsistence to the extent corresponding to the justified needs of the entitled person and the earning and financial possibilities of the debtor.”
This means that there is less possibility of recovering maintenance and it is necessary to prove to the Court that the financial situation is so bad that you cannot meet your basic life needs. The compromise expressed in the judgment stating the guilt of both spouses is also advantageous in that the obligation to provide for the ex-spouse expires after 5 years and may be extended only in special circumstances (see 60 §3 cryo).