Buenos Aires, November 18 (NA) — The Superior Tribunal of Justice of Entre Ríos set a key precedent on the obligation of parents to pay child support to children over 21 years of age, by confirming a support payment for a young man studying Civil Engineering.
According to the Argentine News Agency (NA) learned through a report from Microjuris, the ruling was based on article 663 of the Civil and Commercial Code, which extends the obligation of child support until the age of 25 if the child "continues his studies" that prevent him from "providing for himself with the necessary means".
The court ruled and was uncompromising with a bank that informed a debtor as "irrecoverable" by error.
Here are 10 questions and answers about this ruling:
What did the Justice decide?
The Civil and Commercial Chamber of the Superior Tribunal of Entre Ríos, by majority, upheld a chamber court's decision that obligated a father (J. S.) to pay a support fee to his son (M. J. S.), who is over 21 years old.
Why must he continue paying if the son is an adult?
Because the son is pursuing a degree in Civil Engineering at the UTN.
The court considered that "the magnitude of the career undertaken", the "class hours", the "good grades" and the "total subjects approved" demonstrate that it is impossible for him to "carry out a remunerated activity in parallel".
What did the father argue to avoid paying?
The father argued that the son had not proven his inability to work.
The ruling highlights that the student did not present "formal proof of class schedules".
If he did not present schedules, why did he win the lawsuit?
Because the Chamber (and the majority of the STJ) applied a "presumption with a sufficient degree of certainty".
It was considered that the public information about the workload of Civil Engineering (which reaches 32 weekly class hours, equivalent to 6 daily face-to-face hours), plus the 14 approved subjects, is enough to prove the impossibility.
Were there judges who disagreed?
Yes.
Dr. Carlos Tepsich voted in dissent.
What does the law say exactly (art. 663)?
Article 663 of the Civil and Commercial Code establishes that the obligation of parents subsists until the age of 25 if "the continuation of studies or professional preparation for an art or trade prevents him from providing for himself with the necessary means to sustain himself independently".
Must the student prove that he cannot work?
Yes.
The ruling clarifies that it is not an "automatic extension" of the fee.
The son (or the cohabiting parent) has the "burden of proof" to demonstrate that the intensity of his studies prevents him from working.
Did the student provide proof of his schedules?
No.
He also said that he only does "odd jobs" and that the son has properties (two duplexes and a commercial premises).
What did the Justice say about the father's "odd jobs"?
The court valued the father's economic situation (dedication to "odd jobs" and cohabitation with his sister), but considered that the son's need was proven and the obligation subsisted.
How much did the Justice set for the child support payment?
The sentence set a child support payment equivalent to half (1/2) of the minimum, vital, and mobile salary in effect at the time of payment.
