Rejecting a job offer – without valid justification – could cause the ex-spouse to lose the right to maintenance allowance. The Supreme Court ratifies it in a recent sentence: it would, in fact, be a matter of a violation of the “post-marital duties”, which provide for the principles of “self-determination and self-responsibility” for both ex-partners, i.e. the right – duty to be self-sufficient and autonomous with respect to the other partyin the absence of problems.
The sentence concerns the case of a former couple from Ancona: the ex-husband, who paid his ex-wife a divorce allowance of 48 thousand euros a year, had requested a revocation of the maintenance, because the woman not only had for some time a new stable relationshipbut also had turned down a serious job offer and sure that he would have ensured her an annual income of 32 thousand euros, as well as the possibility of an insurance policy to obtain a supplementary pension.
However, the appeal judges, confirming the first instance sentence, had considered that the stability of the new relationship had not been adequately demonstrated, and that the job offer had been considered “instrumental” to obtain a reduction or revocation of the maintenance allowance (the divorce agreement provided for the possibility of recalculating the amount in the event that the woman had found a part-time job with a monthly salary exceeding one thousand euros).
The Cassation: «The refusal of work can constitute a violation of post-marital duties»
The Cassation, on the other hand, agreed with the ex-husband. The woman’s new relationship was not considered a well-founded reason for an appeal: “On the subject of divorce allowance in favor of the economically weaker ex-spouse, even if he currently lacks adequate means and if he is unable to obtain them for objective reasons , retains the right to the recognition of the cheque, for an exclusively compensatory function”.
The refusal of work, on the other hand, can constitute a breach of post-marital duties. According to the Cassation, the second instance judges should have assessed the seriousness of the offer and its congruity with respect to the woman’s education. In the event that the proposal was adequate, the ex-wife, with her refusal, would have shown not to make an effort to become self-sufficient.
The Cassation has already imposed other restrictions on the request for maintenance. In 2017 the Ermellini, reversing the orientation in force for thirty years, established that the allowance to the ex-spouse should not be connected to the married standard of living. More recently, in recent weeks, the judges have decided to cancel the allowance for the spouse who does not work and who uses the money for “luxury expenses”.
Source: Vanity Fair

I’m Susan Karen, a professional writer and editor at World Stock Market. I specialize in Entertainment news, writing stories that keep readers informed on all the latest developments in the industry. With over five years of experience in creating engaging content and copywriting for various media outlets, I have grown to become an invaluable asset to any team.