Not every breakup goes smoothly. In addition to the heartache, it is usually also necessary to reorganize life. However, anyone who thinks they are going to steal some seed capital from their ex-spouse should think twice about it.
Basically, the following applies: Depending on the duration of the marriage and its circumstances, maintenance is usually to be granted even after the end of the first year of separation, which may be limited under certain circumstances. The wealthier husband must pay the economically weaker husband at least in the first year of the separation without any ifs and buts. When this year is over, the dependent spouse has to take care of income opportunities on his own responsibility.
However, anyone who steals from their ex-spouse can lose their right to separation maintenance. This was decided by the district court (AG) Darmstadt (Az.: (AZ: 51 F 1759/21 EAUE), to which the working group on family law in the German Lawyers' Association (DAV) points out.
How was the case?
Here a couple lived separately. The woman had moved out of the shared apartment with her two children in May 2021 in the absence of her husband. Among other things, she took personal documents from him and three gold bars with a total value of around 150,000 euros, which also belonged to her husband. The couple had been married since 2014.
Which prompted the forsaken to file a complaint. The public prosecutor's office then brought charges against the woman on charges of theft. The matter was heard in court.
What was the verdict?
Apart from the fact that the criminal offense was considered fulfilled, the man does not have to pay the spousal maintenance of around 2500 euros demanded by the woman, the AG decided. Because separation maintenance can be rejected or reduced if the beneficiary is guilty of a crime or serious intentional offense against the maintenance debtor. Theft is also such a serious intentional offence.
This does not apply as long as the household items or personal items of the person obliged to provide maintenance are of a manageable value, which were taken away "in the context of the separation situation". In particular, a high value of the stolen item could mean that there is no claim for maintenance.
Due to the considerable value of the gold bars and the completed theft, a separation alimony would be grossly unfair in the negotiated case. If the gold bars had not been secured, the man would have suffered severe economic damage. Against the background that the man pays monthly child support in the amount of 1,000 euros and bears the childcare fees, an exclusion of the separation maintenance is justified, the court found.
