The Provincial Court of Malaga has estimated the appeal of a father who requested to modify the economic measures set after his divorce, asking for the Extinction of the alimony of 500 euros that paid their children of 26 and 23 years. Justice considers that there has been a substantial alteration of the circumstances from the original sentence and is right.
According to the sentence of May 2025, the father, after having paid eating pensions from the divorce in 2017 of 500 euros per month (250 euros to each child), requested in 2024 the modification of these measures. To do this, he claimed that the 26 -year -old son had already stable work for four years and lived independent and the 23 -year -old daughter had also started working in 2024 as a marketing technique with a monthly salary of 1,100 euros, although she continued studying a master’s degree and lived with her mother because she could not pay a rent.
You may be interested
Santiago Menchero, forced to retire, take away 24% of the pension with 47 years quoted: “We are punished for a life with a life imprisonment”
A woman charges the widowhood pension after marrying in Morocco with a man still linked to another wife and social security claims 15,959.74 euros: the supreme rejects
In the first instance, Family Court No. 5 of Malaga partially estimated his request, extinguished the child’s pension from the date of demand and reduced the daughter’s pension to € 200 per month.
The audience considers that both children are economically independent
After an appeal before the Provincial Court of Malaga, she understood that the daughter has finished her basic academic training, has sufficient income and does not depend economically on her father, so she decided to extinguish the pension definitely since June 2025, at which time she considers that she will cease to have legal justification to continue maintaining it.
The sentence was supported by articles 90, 91 and 93 of the Civil Code, as well as in article 775 of the Civil Procedure Law, which allow to modify measures when they have substantially changed the circumstances that motivated them. He also cited jurisprudence of the Supreme Court that demands that the alterations are not temporary or voluntary and that they are clearly proven.
In addition, he dismantled the arguments of the mother, who claimed that the daughter was not yet independent for not being able to assume a rent. For the audience, this circumstance does not prevent the conclusion of that it has economic autonomy and that it can meet its basic needs.
As for the son, his economic independence was accredited with a fixed payroll of 1,280 euros per month and the finding that he lived on his own. The hearing said Most age does not automatically extinguish the pensionbut in this case the requirements for this are met: job stability, sufficient income and cessation of economic dependence.
Despite everything, the sentence not firm and against it there was a possibility of filing a appeal for the Supreme Court.