The lack of a training or work project on the part of the adult son/daughter makes the refusal of the two job offers facilitated by the father unjustified, it is his/her fault if the same at twenty-two is not yet autonomous.
The allowance check is not due to the adult daughter without plans and willpower.
The Supreme Court rejects the appeal of adult children who oppose the revocation of the maintenance allowance of the father. The female daughter in particular has not shown in recent years that she has a work or training plan. The refusals to the two job offers procured by her father are therefore unmotivated. These are the concepts reaffirmed in the Supreme Court’s judgement which substantially blames “Neet” children who do not study nor work.
The factual background
In a divorce proceeding, the two children ask the judge to order an increase of the monthly contribution due by the father for their maintenance. In particular, they ask to receive 800 Euro instead of 300.
However, the Court, accepting the father’s complaints, ordered to completely revoke his obligation to pay any child allowance. The Court has taken takes this decision because it finds that the 22-year-old daughter dropped out of university after a year without taking an exam, refused two job offers from her father and showed, on several occasions, that she was substantially not consistent in her future plans. A similar order was made for the son, of age and not able to cultivate academic or professional projects.
Child support is not a perpetual welfare measure
The Supreme Court by rejecting children’s arguments concluded, from the evidence gathered that the failure to achieve the daughter’s economic independence was directly attributable to her choices. The young woman refused several job offers for no reason. Furthermore, no inclinations or work aspirations emerged such as to believe that she was following an alternative training path. As specified by the Court, child support does not have an unlimited support function in time and content for adult and unemployed children. The obligation to pay is then no longer valid if the failure to achieve economic autonomy is the result of a lack of commitment to a specific training project.
VGS Family Lawyers is a specialised law firm in family controversies. We are available to assist with any possible claim between children and father/mother, in relation to child allowance.
For any further information email: firstname.lastname@example.org