Judgment issued by the Family, Children and Adolescent Court of Corrientes Corozo Coatia Setting a relevant precedent in terms Food rationsBy specifying that Monotript It does not constitute a binding or exclusive parameter for setting the amount of support.
Corrientes insists on vaccination against measles: “The risk is very high”
The president of the court is the doctor Maria Susanna GaleanoHe rejected the father’s proposal, which claimed that the fee exceeded his real economic capacity, based on his registration in Class A Monotax as an independent attorney.
The judge set child support fees at an amount equal to Minimum Vital and Mobile Wage (SMVM)In addition to the father’s order to provide A Social work To his son.
The real standard of living is above the tax bracket
Judge A. appealed Extensive evaluation of evidence and testimony To reject Monotax cap. She noted that the parents’ actual standard of living and their ability to save are the decisive aspects in determining commitment.
The father claimed that his income was variable and his capabilities were limited, while the mother was a student, lived with her parents, and lacked medical coverage.
The court’s investigation, although the arrest report did not show property or cars in the defendant’s name, was based on Certificate data Whoever agreed that the father:
-
The owner of A Complex of 12 apartments In the city, where he earned an income.
-
I had Fixed period in dollars.
judge Galliano Thus, it was reaffirmed that the low tax category cannot constitute a pretext for demanding values that do not correspond to the real standard of living of the parent and the need to cover the needs of the minor.
Environmental alert: ITBA report reveals high levels of arsenic in two towns in Corrientes
The ruling, which was later confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Corozo Kwatia and Supreme Court of Justice (STJ)He confirmed that the increase between the temporary and final shares amounted to A Rational adequacy To the needs of a three-year-old child and the inflationary context.
The judge said: “Parents cannot justify themselves on the pretext of lack of work or insufficient income, unless this is due to impossibilities or difficulties that cannot be overcome in practice.”