The Provincial Court of Gipuzkoa has ruled in favor of a 52-year-old woman with a total permanent disability to collect compensation of 135,035 euros for her work at home, after her ex-husband tried to avoid said payment by alleging that there was no financial enrichment on his part during the marriage. In this way, the provincial court corrects (and revokes) the ruling of the Court of First Instance, which had been issued considering that an economic benefit to the husband had not been proven, but introduces a nuance in which it nullifies the lifelong compensatory pension of 900 euros per month that had previously been granted to him.
As explained in the ruling SAP SS 22/2026 (available at this link from the Judiciary), the conflict dates back to the dissolution of a marriage that, since 2003, was governed by the property separation system. Now, the ex-husband challenged the monthly pension alleging that there was no real imbalance, while the woman appealed to claim compensation for the 16 years in which she dedicated herself exclusively to raising her three children and taking care of the family home.
Thus, although the Court of First Instance estimated monthly aid based on the worsening of the wife’s situation, the Provincial Court has decided to transform the economic protection model, opting for a single compensatory payment instead of a life annuity.
The Court rules out the need for “enrichment” to charge for domestic work
The Guipuzcoan court has been categorical in rejecting the criteria of the court of origin, describing as irrelevant the absence of an increase in the husband’s assets to recognize the compensation of article 1438 of the Civil Code. The resolution details that the right to this compensation does not require that the debtor is now richer, since the basis of the rule is to compensate the sacrifice of those who contributed their personal work to the common project.
The judges clarify that the woman dedicated herself “exclusively and exclusively to work for the house and family” for 16 years. The court rejects the ex-husband’s excuse that he provided the money, reminding him of something key and that is that thanks to her taking care of everything at home, he was able to go out to work and earn his salary.
For this reason, the magistrates consider “the criterion used by the appellant to be correct” of calculating the figure by multiplying the minimum interprofessional salary by the time of work inactivity, which gives a total of 135,035.20 euros that the ex-husband must pay in a single payment.
Health took precedence over family sacrifice
Now, the Court has taken into account the medical and work reality of the woman to completely agree with the ex-husband regarding the compensatory pension of 900 euros. The court considers that maintaining this payment indefinitely is no longer sustainable, given that the woman’s inability to continue working in her original profession was not a direct consequence of married life.
The ruling explains that the fact that the woman is not currently dedicated to hairdressing (her initial profession) “does not depend on her age or a lack of updating her knowledge (…) but on a situation of total permanent disability” derived from her vasculitis problems. Upon verifying that the woman is integrated into the labor market working in the cleaning sector, the court concludes that a loss of professional expectations due to marriage has not been proven.
Thus, when weighing the situation of both, Justice has decided to extinguish the monthly pension, determining that “any imbalance that may have occurred (…) is compensated with the compensation that we set in this same resolution.” In this way, the ruling balances the balance: it guarantees compensation for the years of service to the home, but frees the ex-husband from a lifetime pension as the structural imbalance required by law does not exist.