What is actually when one spouse earns a very good and the maintenance table is no longer relevant? Because the various tables of the appeal courts do not write the income limit up and set up according to the proportional expenses.
separated the spouses, a spouse from the other by the living conditions and the earnings and financial ratios the spouses appropriate form of support. Is pending between the separated spouses the divorce proceedings, including the maintenance of the occurrence of the pendency of the cost of appropriate insurance for the case of old age and diminished earning capacity. The non-working spouse can only be pointed out to earn his living through gainful employment even if this is expected to say according to his personal circumstances, particularly because of an earlier work of the duration of marriage, and on the economic circumstances of both spouses can. As far as the first time the law.
was the above-average income of the spouse not for the lifetime entirely for general living expenses consumed, but partially supplied to the wealth creation are not considered in the maintenance tax corresponding parts of the income, if disposable income is not wealth creation unduly. For it is not among the purposes of spousal maintenance, after the separation of the creditor in the same manner as the maintenance debtor to enable the formation of property. Rather, the needy spouse for the maintenance of those funds will be made available, it needs to meet its ongoing needs of life as it meets the standard of living in marriage, OLG Koblenz, 2000.
The problem of high income in the maintenance calculation may in particular result in child support. The measure of the children of amounts due pursuant to § 1610 BGB depends not on the marital relationships of the parties but to the life position of dependence. This position in life lead the children regularly from the current position in life of barunterhaltspflichtigen parent, as the Supreme Court has stated on several occasions. Only if the child already has its own position in life, his need for maintenance is calculated thereafter, which can justify a permanent need for maintenance for children.
It corresponds to the judicial practice to be guided in determining the proper maintenance of the developed by the Higher Regional Courts table works, the reported in this table works Indicative rates can be understood as empirical data that the life needs of the child - focused on the economic circumstances of parents and the child's age - based on average cost of living typify so as to achieve a uniform treatment of similar life situations.
The income groups of the tables are capped. For these sets of increasing net income as the Düsseldorf table on the "circumstances of the case". That sounds like fairness and is at first difficult justiciable. The Federal Court had earlier, that although the child support is no fixed upper limit admit the derivation of the child support out of the life status of parents may lead, but do not want the children to the above-average economic circumstances of the parents corresponding position in life needed to be enabled. If the claimant but in view of a further performance of the obligated one to the already existing ample sized meeting the general requirements beyond most high maintenance requirements want to do, he must explain in detail what this needs to exist and the means necessary to its satisfaction in the following may be the need for a specific needs assessment justifies high income not only from the risk of misuse of the exclusively to meet demand, the child's specific maintenance. They can also be explained by the difficulty in identifying significantly above-average living conditions of the parents that adequate living conditions of children and cutting - as a benchmark - to generalize blanket. The Düsseldorf table draw the line at a possible generalization of the net income. Such lump sum limit seems appropriate and does not permit the continuation of the schematic understood as empirical values indicative sentences in individual cases.
Beyond the Dusseldorf in the table implied by general court experience but it is generally here that explain the creditor and must prove its needs. The requirements for this burden of proof, however, may not be overdrawn. Even at higher income parents must remain assured that children participate in an age-appropriate manner to achieve a lifestyle that corresponds to the most favorable economic situation of their parents, to whom they are often used in living with their parents and they will have to remain even after separation of the parents received in principle. As this lifestyle is designed in detail what the needs of the child are to meet on its basis and the wishes of the child as a mere participation in the luxury not to be met, according to the Federal Court is not, generally speaking, but only on a case by assessing the particular circumstances of those affected are identified. This overall circumstances and needs have to be outlined in detail by the creditor. In this case the burden of proof should not be excessive requirements. In particular, the creditor would not normally be expected may be, his whole - even elementary - expenses specified in great detail to explain. It is rather regular player limit itself to prove special or particularly costly and needs to demonstrate the means to fulfill them are necessary. Moreover, the Court, to assess the such an increased demand has not prevented the rush charge to cover the amount required by reference to the added amount that results from the juxtaposition of such special needs with already by the standards of the Düsseldorf table covered basic needs, and appreciate the help general experiential knowledge.
If you are faced with this legal problem, we can give you represent, because we had to do with this constellation represented here many times before.
lawyer Dr. Palm
More about "maintenance" can be found here>>
0 comments:
Post a Comment