A woman has managed to recognize the widowhood pension after social security is denied in understanding that the payment of the mortgage could not be considered as a compensatory pension. The Supreme Court confirms the judgment of the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia explaining that the mortgage payment does fulfill the economic aid function and, therefore, gives the right to receive the benefit.
According to the sentence, the woman married in 1980, but in 2009 she divorced, remaining that the husband had to contribute 50 euros per month to each of her daughters and that both spouses “must contribute, in the middle, to the payment of the monthly quota of the loan granted by the Bank of Castile.” After the death of his ex -husband in October 2018, he requested the widow’s pension to Social Security, but it was denied.
You may be interested
Lola Prieto (89 years old): “I did not marry to continue charging my widowhood pension”
A woman runs out of the widow’s pension after living with her partner 24 years and grants the previous wife a pension of 1,663.87 euros: the de facto couple did not formalize
Social Security explained that the woman did not meet the requirements included in article 220 of the General Social Security Law, which is that in the case of divorced, a compensatory pension will charge. The woman explained that her ex -husband paid 50% of the mortgage loan of habitual housing, but the INSS explained that this could not be considered “compensatory pension.”
Mortgage loan as a compensatory pension
After the refusal, the widow decided to go to court, being dismissed in the first instance before the Social Court No. 2 of Cádiz. Not being as he decided to resort to the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia, which did prove the widow to collect the pension.
The Chamber explained that it could be considered compensatory “any economic contribution made by periodic character by the Exclying, regardless of the denomination granted by the parties, which reveals the economic dependence of the deceased at the time of death.”
Now both the National Social Security Institute and the General Treasury of Social Security decided to resort to the Supreme Court, not being satisfied, claiming contradiction with the doctrine of the TSJ of the Basque Country (resource 535/2023). Despite this, the high court explained that the purpose of the compensatory pension is to mitigate the imbalance after divorce, and in this case, the husband’s obligation to pay half of the mortgage met that goal.
The Chamber explains that “even when the beneficiary was not perceptual of compensatory pension in cases in which the Exconyuge made a contribution that helped improve the economic situation of the other, such as the case of cars, namely, when he paid half of the fee of the mortgage loan of the family housing assigned to the wife.”
That is, as the ex -husband paid the mortgage mita, it was understood that there was already a compensatory benefit, since this “helped improve the economic circumstances of the plaintiff after divorce”, so he confirmed the right of women to perceive the widowhood pension.