Nobody dreams of leaving the marital home and flying to live with a new partner pushed by the wings of “feeling”, leaving the family on the spot and leaving the marital home without thinking about it, without even presenting a judicial request for separation.
For the Supreme Court, a new “falling in love” does not justify anything, and to leave the house without consequences – such as the charge in having determined the end of the marriage – it is necessary at least to write to the judge that cohabitation with the husband / wife has become unbearable for the reaction triggered by the confession of palpitating for another person.
Otherwise melt away by saying that he has finally found “the story of my life” integrates “by law the violation of the obligation of cohabitation” between spouses, a violation from which “the separation charge cannot fail”. So the ermellinì accepted the appeal of a wife left in the lurch, despite “a perfect material and spiritual union”, one morning in May 2010 when her spouse – with whom she also shared two children and a pharmacy – told her ” of having fallen in love with another woman “. “It’s the story of my life, I want to separate”, the words of the abandonment.
The judges of merit had ruled out any wrongdoing and had established joint custody of the children, with the father’s obligation to pay 1,200 euros a month for them and 700 euros for his wife. But the “guilt” of the fugitive husband had been excluded: according to the Tuscan judges, first of all the Pistoia Court and then the Florence Court of Appeal, it was clear that “the continuation of material coexistence had become difficult to bear for both spouses and in any case unsuitable for ending the fracture of the marital relationship “.
In short, it was clear that “after the outcry” confessor made by Carlo to the incredulous and dismayed Alessandra, it was necessary to “assume that at that point” there was nothing more to be done, only “the acknowledgment of the spouses of the situation of crisis “of their union. In the opinion of the Supreme Court this reasoning is wrong and is based on “a mere supposition”. The decision not to proceed with the charge, writes the Supreme Court, “was not based on a certain fact, capable of proving that the abandonment of the marital home by the husband -” who had not even confessed ‘existence of an extramarital relationship already in progress, but only of nurturing an affective feeling towards another woman “-” was determined by the behavior of his wife, also in reaction to this confession. “Now the Florentine Court must retrace its steps and no longer use “feeling” as a free all.
.