| Summary: | T.________, a woman from [...], R. complained________, a man from [...], on payment of alimony.
R.________argued that he was not subject to maintenance, since he was not the father of the child of T.________.
The first court dismissed the claim.
T.________ appealed.
The Cantonal Court granted the appeal and ordered R.________ to pay alimony.
More detailed summary:
T.________and R.________werein a relationship. In this relationship it came to a child.
T.________demanded from R.________alimony for the child.
R.________denied paternity, and therefore argued that he was not subject to maintenance.
The first court dismissed the claim.
T.________appealed.
The Cantonal Court conducted a DNA test, which confirmed the paternity of R.________.
The Cantonal Court granted the appeal and ordered R.________to pay alimony.
Explanation:
Art. 285 CCIs the provision of the Swiss Civil Code that regulates the maintenance obligation of parents for their children.
The plaintiff is the person who demands alimony. In this case it is T.________.
The defendant is the person from whom alimony is demanded. In this case it is R.________.
The first court is the court of first instance, in this case the Civil Court of the Canton of Vaud.
The Cantonal Court is the court of second instance, in this case the Cantonal Court of Vaud.
I hope this summary is helpful. |
| Comment: | Spühler, Schweizer, Basler Kommentar Schweizerische Zivilprozessordnung, Art.319 ZPO, 2017 |