Today we comment on a judgment that has given much to talk about these days and whose content we agree with: it is a ruling issued by the Provincial Court of Jaén, in which a woman is granted the right to receive from her ex-husband a lifetime compensatory pension, and this despite the fact that the divorce settlement agreement that both signed set a duration of 6 years for this pension. The wife claims to have signed the divorce agreement under duress, and there is also a conviction for abuse by her husband during the marriage.
You may be interested in… Compensatory pension: What happens when the wife’s salary depends on the husband’s company? The sentence, which has been appealed by the ex-husband before the Supreme Court, corrects the ruling issued in the first instance by a court in Linares.
In this case, the couple – who divorced in 2012, having two children in common and having married in 1980 – signed an agreement that obliged the ex-husband to pay 300 euros monthly to his ex-wife for a period of 6 years, which was to be completed in 2019.
As of that date, the man stopped contributing that amount. This is a woman who, as stated in the judgment, lacks professional experience, is unemployed, has no possibility of working or resources and does not receive any pension or subsidy – apart from the now extinct compensatory pension from her husband -, so she decided to go to court.
She would only be entitled to receive a non-contributory pension of between 92.48 and 360.90 euros once she reaches the age of 65.
In addition, during the trial, the woman claimed to have been subjected to “a lot of pressure” at the time of the signing, due to the “violence exercised” by her husband.
Thus, the appellant assured the court that she signed the agreement under pressure and under a state of imbalance that prevented her from discerning what she was signing.
Hence, she asked the Court that the temporary compensatory pension be converted into a life annuity, or that it be extended until she receives a non-contributory pension from the Social Security system.
Economic imbalance and poor probability calculation
When we speak of compensatory pension we refer to the one that one of the spouses receives from the other one in case the separation or divorce has produced a situation of economic imbalance in relation to the position of the other one.
That is to say, that economically his or her situation has worsened with respect to the one he or she had during the marriage.
On this basis, the question to be resolved by the Court is whether it is possible to assess the economic imbalance necessary for there to be a right to a life annuity at a time subsequent to the divorce, when, despite the legal requirements being met, the parties have validly waived the constitution of the pension as a life annuity.
In this regard, the Supreme Court has assured that the right to a compensatory pension is a subjective right with which “it is simply intended to maintain the balance, that is, that each of the spouses can maintain the economic level they had during the marriage”, and that the agreed pension can only be modified due to “substantial alteration” in the fortune of one or the other spouse. However, the Court assures that, regarding the agreement reached between both parties of the couple, “it is surprising that the parties did not make a correct calculation of probability, since the woman, 53 years old at the time of signing the agreement, lacked training, studies, and had little work experience, having dedicated the years of marriage to housework and raising their children”. “This improbable employment forecast benefited the husband and was detrimental to the wife, as has been proven over the course of these 6 years, in which the wife is 59 years old, has no job (she has only worked two days in these six years), and has no possibility of finding one due to her circumstances and those of the labor market”. Therefore, the Chamber considers that “new circumstances arise, not predicted by the parties”, such as “the impossibility for the woman to find a job”. “In summary, it must be understood that the situations that pre-existed and were known at the time of the regulatory agreement, but are ignored for the benefit of one of them, may constitute a substantial alteration”.
Women, victims of abuse
The judgment also states that “the content of the agreement is at least surprising, since the divorce effectively produced an economic imbalance in the woman, which she tried to alleviate with the granting of a compensatory pension of 300 euros per month for a period of 6 years”.
“The personal situation in which the appellant found herself, immersed in criminal proceedings for denouncing her husband for having been a victim of abuse (there is a sentence in which the ex-husband was convicted for a crime of habitual abuse and a lack of damages) cannot be disregarded “.
“Supposedly with what was agreed in the agreement it was intended to reestablish the economic and labor situation of the appellant, so it must be understood, given the circumstances, that the economic imbalance existing at the time of the divorce is maintained and consequently it is appropriate to fix a compensatory pension for these exceptional circumstances, which does not presuppose, like alimony between spouses, a situation of need in the creditor, but the finding of an effective economic imbalance to her detriment, whether or not that situation of need is involved” .
Finally, the sentence recalls that it is necessary, for the right to the compensatory pension of article 97 of the Civil Code to arise: a) The existence of an economic imbalance to compensate, understanding as such the decrease that the separation or divorce causes in the standard of living of the spouses in relation to the one that the other spouse maintains, which imposes a comparison of the needs of each separated spouse and the resources that he/she has to satisfy them, resources that in an orientative way are determined in the referred precept.
b) That such imbalance implies a worsening in the situation that was in the marriage, worsening that must refer to the moment of the matrimonial rupture and the circumstances to be evaluated according to the accredited in the case file, without prejudice that, existing later an essential variation of the same ones, its modification can be requested.
“In view of the above, there was undoubtedly at the time of the marital crisis a real inequality of assets that has not been alleviated subsequently, which is why the petition is accepted, recognizing the appellant’s right to receive a compensatory pension of 300 euros per month for life, which may be subject to variation if circumstances change”.
If you need help to receive a pension of this type or you need a lawyer for your divorce or separation, contact us without obligation.
