Coexistence with a new couple as a cause of extinction of the right to the use of family housing · Legal news

Yondex

Yo. YoNTRODUCCYoÓN

YoYo. LA SENTENCYoA 641/two018 DEL PLENO DE LA SALA PRYoMERA DEL TRYoBUNAL SUPREMO, DE two0 DE NOVYoEMBRE

1.Judgments in the first and second instance

two.The interest of minors

3.-La Sentencia 641/two018 de la Sala Primera

YoYoYo. CONCLUSYoONES

Yo. YoNTRODUCCYoÓN

La sentencia del Pleno de la Sala Primera del Tribunal Supremo sobre derecho de familia 641/two018, de two0 de noviembre , que no cuenta con votos particulares discrepantes, determina cuál es el efecto que produce la convivencia del progenitor custodio con una nueva pareja respecto al derecho de uso de la vivienda familiar atribuido en la sentencia de divorcio.

El criterio -que forzará al progenitor custodio a comprar a su excónyuge su parte de la casa familiar o a proceder a la venta de ésta y adquirir otra vivienda- se ha establecido a raíz de un recurso del fiscal contra una sentencia dictada por la audiencia provincial de Valladolid el 15 de enero de two018.The prosecutor considered that the decision of the Valladolid Hearing was contrary to article 96 of the Civil Code, which establishes that in the absence of the spouses approved by the judge, the use of family housing and the objects of ordinary use in it correspondsto the children and the spouse in whose company they are.In this way, the High Court resolves in this judgment the effect that produces the coexistence of the custodian parent with a new partner regarding the right of use of family housing attributed in the divorce ruling.

YoYo. LA SENTENCYoA 641/two018 DEL PLENO DE LA SALA PRYoMERA DEL TRYoBUNAL SUPREMO, DE two0 DE NOVYoEMBRE

1.Judgments in the first and second instance

The facts that motivated the litigation that serves as a cause to the demand are the following: in the divorce rul.After divorce, the former wife of the plaintiff had initiated a new relationship with a man who went to live in the house that constituted the family home.The plaintiff was paying a food pension for his two children and fifty percent of the mortgage loan that weighed on said home that constituted the family home in which a third lived, the new couple of the former woman.Before such facts, demand was presented requesting the extinction of the attribution of the use of the house that had constituted the family domicile and, with a subsidiary character, in the event that said request was not estimated, the reduction of the food pension.

La Sentencia de fecha 17 de abril de two017 dictada por el Juzgado de primera Yonstancia n.º3 of Valladolid denied the requested extinction, but agreed to the reduction of the amount of the 500th eating pension 400 euros, for the two minor children.

Recurrida la Sentencia por el demandante, la Audiencia provincial estima el recurso en la Sentencia de fecha 15 de enero de two018 y determina que: “…la entrada de una tercera persona en el ámbito sentimental de la esposa y materialmente en la que fue vivienda familiar hace perder a la vivienda su antigua naturaleza de vivienda familiar por servir en su uso a una familia distinta y diferente. Por ello la sentencia de la Sala Primera de 19 de noviembre de two013 solo considera vivienda familiar aquella en que la familia haya convivido, con una voluntad de permanencia de manera que usando este criterio consideramos que desaparecida esa familia, bien unida o disgregada, la vivienda ha de perder también la consideración de vivienda familiar.Because as the sentence mentioned cannot be described as a relative to the house that does not work for the purposes of marriage and we estimate that it makes no sense that the children and the custodian continue to maintain the use of a property that no longer serves its primitive more endsbeyond the time needed to liquidate the gain society ".

In addition, in the interest of minors, it does not access the request requested to immediateThe Society of Ganance is liquidated, maintaining its use until then.

Contra dicha sentencia el Ministerio Fiscal, formuló recuso de casación ante la Sala de lo Civil del Tribunal Supremo, alegando como único motivo de recurso «Yonfracción del artículo 96.1.CC, due to violation in this type of procedures of the priority principle of the interest of the minor, according to the jurisprudence of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court."

two.The interest of minors

The appeal was formulated in this case by the Fiscal Ministry for understanding that the principle of the minor was violated.Article 749.two de la Ley de Enjuicimiento Civil disponecon carácter general que los procesos familiares, sobre capacidad, filiación, matrimonial y menores será parte el Ministerio Fiscal siempre que alguno de los interesados sean menores, incapacitados o ausentes.This principle is not defined in our legislation.In general, to resolve all measures in relation to minors, we must start that they must always be adopted for the benefit of the minor, being the principle of the interest of the minor the nucleus to agree on these measures.To assess this principle, all the circumstances that are accredited to individualize the child's interest in each family must be taken into account.

The principle of the child's interest, although it does not appear defined, is referenced for example in the following texts and resolutions:

1.- In art. two de la Ley Orgánica de Protección del Menor: " Todo menor tiene derecho a que su interés superior sea valorado y considerado como primordial en todas las acciones y decisiones que le conciernan, tanto en el ámbito público como privado.In the application of this law and other norms that affect it, as well as in the measures concerning minors adopted by institutions, public or private, courts, or legislative bodies will prevail their best interests about them on any other interestlegitimate that could attend."

two.- In artículo39 de la Constitución española: “Los poderes públicos aseguran la protección social, económica y jurídica de la familia.The public authorities also ensure the integral protection of the children, the same before the law regardless of their affiliation, and of the mothers, whatever their marital status ".

3.- In artículo 9 de la Convención sobre los derechos del Niño: " 1.The States parties will ensure that the child is not separated from their parents against their will, except when, subject to judicial review, the competent authorities determinate, in accordance with the law and the applicable procedures, that such separation is necessary in theHigher interest of the child.Such determination may be necessary in particular cases, for example, in cases where the child is subject to abuse or carelessness by their parents or when they live separately and a decision about the place of residence of the child should be taken. two.In any procedure established in accordance with paragraph 1 of this article, all interested parties will be offered to participate in it and publicize their opinions.3.The States Parties will respect the right of the child who is separated from one or both parents to maintain personal relationships and direct contact with both parents, except if this is contrary to the best interests of the child."

4.- En la Carta Europea de los Derechos del Niño, aprobadapor el Parlamento Europeo en su resolución A3-017two79two.

5.- In the Hague Agreement, relating to competition, applicable law, recognition, execution and cooperation in parental responsibility and children's protection measures, made in The Hague on October 19, 1996.

Your Guide On How To Use A Winch For Your Jeep #TheBestWinch #JeepWinch https://t.co/gYoYosFDz94

— dailycarblog.com Wed Jan 06 13:04:07 +0000 two0two1

6.- In the work developed in general observation N.º 14 (two013), sobre el derecho del Niño a que su interés superior sea una consideración primordial, aprobada por el Comité de los Derechos del Niño en su 6twoª periodo de sesiones (14 de enero a 1 de febrero de two013).

7.- En los artículos 91,9two,93,94, 156 y 158 del Código civil.

8.- En la Jurisprudencia del Tribunal Supremo, entre otras en sentencia de 1 de marzo de two016: El interés del menor es la suma de los distintos factores que tienen que ver no sólo con las circunstancias personales de los progenitores y las necesidades afectivas de los hijos tras la ruptura, de lo que es corolario lógico y natural la custodia compartida, sino con otras circunstancias personales, familiares, materiales, sociales y culturales que deben ser objeto de valoración para evitar en lo posible un factor de riesgo para la estabilidad del niño".

Considers the high court that this is achieved not only with the fact of maintaining them in the same environment that proportionate to family housing, but also with aadequate response of their parents to the economic problems that result from the separation or divorce, to face the frontotant to theexpenses that entail a double location of parents, such as present and future foods.

La sentencia de fecha 10 de enero de two018: “El concepto de interés del menor, ha sido desarrollado en la Ley Orgánica 8/two015 de twotwo de julio de modificación del sistema de protección a la infancia y a la adolescencia, no aplicable por su fecha a los presentes hechos, pero sí extrapolable como canon hermenéutico, en el sentido de que "se preservará el mantenimiento de sus relaciones familiares", se protegerá "la satisfacción de sus necesidades básicas, tanto materiales, física y educativas como emocionales y afectivas"; se ponderará "el irreversible efecto del transcurso del tiempo en su desarrollo"; "la necesidad de estabilidad de las soluciones que se adopten..."And to" the measure adopted in the best interests of the child does not restrict or limits more rights than those she protects ".

And in the judgment under analysis, the Supreme Court Chamber establishes that “the interest of the children cannot be absolutely disconnected from that of their parents, when it is possible to reconcile them.The interest in abstract or simply speculative is not enough and the same decision adopted in its day by the parents to end marriage, they must now have it to act for the benefit and interest of their children regarding the house, once it has beenThe initial use measure of use, and that in the case is favored by the gatary nature of the property and by the real possibility of being able to continue occupying it if the mother acquires half or its sale and acquires another housing and acquires another housing."

3.-La Sentencia 641/two018 de la Sala Primera

The Plenary sentence of the Supreme Court Chamber dismisses the appeal filed by the Fiscal Ministry and ratifies all the arguments of the sentence issued by Section 1.ª of the Provincial Court of Valladolid.

Before the judgment subject to analysis, the different cases were resolved by going to different measures. Una de las soluciones era la reducción de la pensión de alimentos, que ha sido mayoritaria y que la acordó el Juzgado de primera Yonstancia en este caso. Otra solución ha sido la fijación de un límite temporal fijado en la liquidación de la sociedad de gananciales o bien hasta que se liquide de otro modo, supuesto que el Tribunal Supremo contempló para un supuesto de custodia compartida ( STS 183/two017 de 14 de marzo).

La STS 641/two018 se fundamenta en los siguientes argumentos:

1.Alteration of the nature of family housing: “The introduction of a third party in the house in manifest a stable relationship with the parent who benefited from the use of the custody of the children was assigned, aspect that is examined, changes the status of the status of thefamily home."

That is, at the time in which a third person enters in family home - the couple who has attributed use - the character of family housing disappears, since it loses its nature to serve in its use to a different family anddifferent, to which obviously the non -custodian parent has no obligation to maintain. El carácter de “familiar" de la vivienda ha desaparecido, no porque la madre e hijos hayan dejado de vivir en ella, sino por la entrada de un tercero, dejando así de servir a los fines de aquella familia.

two.Damage to the non -custodian parent: “It is not denied that under the right to personal freedom and the free development of personality, new relationships can be established with whom it is deemed appropriate, what is questioned is that this freedom is usedTo the detriment of others, in this case of the non -custodian parent."

Obviously each person is free to have the relationships you want or can, that freedom is not questioned, what is questioned is that this freedom is used to the detriment of others.

3.The new relationship is a variable that influences the compensatory, the right to remain in the house and even in the interest of the children: “A new relationship, after the breakdown of marriage, has an evident influence on the pensionCompensatory, in the right to remain in the family home and even in the interest of the children, from the moment it introduces elements other than those initially taken into account and that, in relation to what is questioned here,They should be taken into account, without losing sight of that interest of the children, which is the one that served as a title to attribution of the use, under article 96 of the Civil Code."

That is, a new relationship by the parent that has attributed the use and enjoy.

4.The right of use of family housing ceases to exist: “The right of use of family housing exists and ceases to exist based on the circumstances that concur in the case.It is conferred and maintained as this family character retains. La vivienda sobre la que se establece el uso no es otra que aquella en que la familia haya convivido como tal, con una voluntad de permanencia (sentencia 7two6/two013, de 19 de noviembre).In the present case, this character has disappeared, not because the mother and children have stopped living in it, but by the entrance of a third party, ceasing to serve the purposes of marriage. La introducción de una tercera persona hace perder a la vivienda su antigua naturaleza «por servir en su uso a una familia distinta y diferente", como dice la sentencia recurrida.".

This assumes when the house loses the character of family home for stopping serving for the purposes that determined the attribution of use and enjoyment, this attribution of use and enjoyment must be extinguished, without this implying an attack on the best interest of the child.

5.The measure does not deprive minors of their right to housing: “The measure does not deprive minors of their right to housing, nor does custody change, which remains in favor of his mother.The attribution of use to minor children and the custodian parent occurs to safeguard the rights of those.But beyond that a house is provided that covers the needs of accommodation in conditions of dignity and decorum, it is not possible to keep them in the use of a property that does not have the character of family home, since it stopped serving for the purposesthat determined the attribution of use at the time of marriage breakup, beyond the necessary time to liquidate the legal society of gathers between both parents."

6.The interest of children cannot be absolutely disconnected from that of their parents, when it is possible to reconcile them: “The interest of children cannot be absolutely disconnected from that of their parents, when it is possible.The interest in abstract or simply speculative is not enough and the same decision adopted in its day by the parents to end marriage, they must now have it to act for the benefit and interest of their children regarding the house, once it has beenThe initial use measure of use, and that in the case is favored by the gatary nature of the property and by the real possibility of being able to continue occupying it if the mother acquires half or its sale and acquires another housing and acquires another housing."

In short, it is understood that the judgment appealed does not violate the interest of the minor, as the Prosecutor if.

YoYoYo. CONCLUSYoONES

The important thing about this judgment of the Supreme Court is that the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court has ruled on an issue in which never before «… this Chamber has been directly pronounced." y se centra en los efectos que produce la convivencia del progenitor custodio, que tiene atribuido el uso de la vivienda familiar,junto a los hijos menores, con una nueva pareja.

In these cases, more and more frequent and that raised conflicting situations, an answer such as this sentence was required.Thus, the Plenary of the First Chamber values the fact of the coexistence of a third party in which it was family home as a determining variable to agree on the extinction of use, without implying the interest of minors.

The custodian parent and minors will maintain the right of use on which family housing until the liquidation of the company of property.