Jugement Kantonsgericht (VD - HC/2019/871)

Canton:	VD
Case number:	HC/2019/871

Instance:	Kantonsgericht
Department:	Cour d'appel civile

Kantonsgericht Entscheid HC/2019/871 vom 11.05.2020 (VD)

Date:	11.05.2020
Force of law:	-

Summary:	The plaintiff Z.________ requested the revision of two judgments of the lower instance, which denied her the right to payment of alimony to the defendant F.________. The plaintiff argued that the lower instance made an error in calculating the alimony claim. The court concluded that the appeal was well-founded. The court annulled the two judgments of the lower court and referred the case back to the lower court. The lower court will now recalculate the claimant's maintenance claim. More detailed summary: The plaintiff Z.________ and the defendant F.________ were previously married. After the divorce, the defendant was awarded alimony by the plaintiff for the common child. The plaintiff now requested the revision of two judgments of the lower court, which denied her the right to payment of alimony. The plaintiff argued that the lower instance made an error in calculating the alimony claim. In particular, the lower court had overestimated the defendant's merit. The court concluded that the appeal was well-founded. The court annulled the two judgments of the lower court and referred the case back to the lower court. The lower court will now recalculate the claimant's maintenance claim. Explanations of individual passages of the judgment: Par prononcé du 7 mars 2016, le Tribunal de première instance de Genève a prononcé le divorce des parties. This passage states that the Civil Court in Geneva pronounced the divorce of the parties on March 7, 2016. Par jugement du 30 août 2016, la Juge déléguée de la Cour d’appel civile du Tribunal cantonal a condamné le défendeur à verser à la requérante une pension alimentaire mensuelle de CHF 2000. This passage states that on August 30, 2016, the lower court sentenced the defendant to pay the plaintiff a monthly alimony of 2000 francs. Par jugement du 15 février 2019, la Juge déléguée de la Cour d’appel civile du Tribunal cantonal a confirmé ce jugement. This passage states that on February 15, 2019, the lower court confirmed the verdict of August 30, 2016. La requérante soutient que la Juge déléguée de la Cour d’appel civile du Tribunal cantonal a commis une erreur dans le calcul de l’obligation alimentaire du défendeur. This passage states that the plaintiff claims that the lower instance made a mistake in calculating the defendant's maintenance obligation. La Juge déléguée de la Cour d’appel civile du Tribunal cantonal considère que la requête de révision est fondée. This passage says that the lower instance has come to the conclusion that the revision is justified.
Rule of Law:	Art. 100 LTF;Art. 106 CPC;Art. 111 CPC;Art. 145 CPC;Art. 179 CC;Art. 191 CPC;Art. 276 CPC;Art. 297 CPC;Art. 308 CC;Art. 328 CPC;Art. 328s CPC;Art. 329 CPC;Art. 74 LTF;Art. 95 CPC;Art. 97 LTF;
BGE reference::	-
Comment:	-

Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.

Click here to return to the page search engine.