An Italian spent over 500,000 euros with his Romanian girlfriend, ending up in the situation of not being able to pay alimony to his ex-wife. The woman sued him, and the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the ex-wife, entrusting the man to the care of a guardian.
The Italian was put in the care of a guardian who will check his expenses PHOTO archive Adevărul
The Supreme Court of Italy judged an unusual case that happened in the town of Ferrara. An Italian woman waged a veritable legal war against her ex-husband who, after a consensual divorce, quickly squandered his fortune to have fun with his Romanian girlfriend.
Nothing unusual so far, according to the court, only that the man ended up in the situation of not being able to pay the alimony owed to his ex-wife, and he sued him.
A legal battle which lasted for years and which finally ended with a confirmation of the sentence at first instance and a reversal of it on appeal, when the Court held (excluding the alimony of the ex-husband) that the ex-wife “he had other means to satisfy or guarantee his claim”, according to Il Sussidiario.
On the other hand, the Court of Cassation decided to appeal to the concept of “prodigality”, defined by the Court of Human Rights as the (almost pathological) tendency to spend money excessively “in relation to one's own socio-economic conditions and the value that can be objectively attributed to money” and which is not attributable to a possible mental problem suffered by the ex-husband (also excluded from the medico-legal analyses), but which still involves the risk of poverty.
“Ex-husband must pay alimony”
In its decision, the Supreme Court of Italy wanted to point out that “a person is free to dispose of his goods, even to a large and extensive extent, reducing what he legitimately disposes of” and no one, for that matter, can tell the woman's ex-husband how to spend his money.
However, this freedom cannot imply, even collaterally, “a condition in which, not only is he no longer able to ensure the duties of solidarity that have already been imposed on him”with clear reference to the alimony requested of the Italian by his ex-life partner, “but even those in favor of one's own person, who would otherwise be forced to resort to the social aid offered by the state, despite his ability to lead a dignified life”.
The man, it is also stated in the sentence, because “to his prodigious behavior, which he spent large sums of money lavishlytaking excessive risks in relation to its socio-economic conditions and failing to recognize any objective value attributable to money”, spent over an undefined period of time “approximately 512,000 euros” from his rich personal heritage.
Therefore, in the face of all these aspects, the most appropriate choice, in the opinion of the Court, is for the Italian to be entrusted to the care of a guardian, whose sole task will be to ensure that he pays what was agreed in the agreement of finalized divorce with his ex-wife.
