Credit against the community property

The Supreme Court (TS) has resolved a fairly typical case after a divorce , when a former couple has already settled the community property (that is, they have divided the common property), one of the former spouses later tries to "reopen" reopen debt of the marriage what he paid for years for compensatory pension for alimony In this matter, in the

regulatory agreement regulatory agreement amount for family expenses amount for family charges terminated extinguished the contribution to the charges and later the alimony was revoked. In between, they both reached an settlement agreement of marital property, they set a single asset in the assets (a percentage of the house) and left the liabilities at zero euros, without reserving anything "just in case".

After that agreement, the husband filed a lawsuit to add those amounts already paid to the settlement, with the idea that they would be considered debts of the marital community and that she would refund him half.

The Supreme Court tells him no. It explains that both the contribution to expenses agreed in the agreement and the compensatory allowance are personal obligations of the spouse who pays them, and the amounts paid for these concepts do not become a "credit" against the marital community. And clarifies a key point, even if the compensatory allowance has been extinguished, that extinction does not change the nature of the amount paid before nor automatically generates the right to reimbursement.

Furthermore, the Court emphasizes that the "claim for addition" addition action " does not serve to economically review an already accepted settlement, but to add assets or values that were truly omitted. It also rules out any unjust enrichment , because the payments had a valid reason, the agreement and the court resolutions that were in force until their termination.