Jurisprudence of Civil Law 2019 with Commentary

Abstract

The plaintiff referred to the court a claim for partition of property held in common acquired during the parties’ marriage. As regards the differentiated co-owners’ parts of the contribution requested by the plaintiff, the court found that the plaintiff had submitted evidence regarding the income earned during the marriage amounting to approximately EUR 4,000/year from different employers. As regards the income earned by the defendant, due to his active role, the court requested evidence from the tax administration, and the documents that ANAF submitted to the Court showed that he had gained an income amounting to lei 12 during the entire marital period. However, under the circumstances in which the defendant did not prove the collection of any additional income from work or other activities, by indicating his workplaces, the court could only consider the income earned in the country. Comparing these incomes, during the entire marital period of the parties, it follows that the plaintiff had benefited from significantly higher incomes compared to those earned by the defendant, and in consideration to the principle of Availability of civil proceedings, for lack of contrary evidence, the court acknowledged that the parties had a contribution of: 70% the plaintiff and 30% the defendant.