The University students request for alimony was refused to sue his father. The court of second instance ruled that way.

category:Hot
 The University students request for alimony was refused to sue his father. The court of second instance ruled that way.


College students sue their fathers for tuition fees

Lao Wang and his ex-wife had a son Xiao Wang. In 2004, Lao Wang and his ex-wife were divorced through court mediation. The mediation agreement stipulated that Xiao Wang should be brought up by his ex-wife. Lao Wang paid a maintenance fee of 2,000 yuan per month until Xiao Wang lived independently. After the divorce, Lao Wang paid Xiao Wangs alimony until Xiao Wang reached the age of 18. Since then, no alimony has been paid to Xiao Wang.

In July 2017, Xiao Wang was admitted to the university, so he asked Lao Wang to continue to pay the maintenance fee of 2100 yuan per month and to pay the expenses of accommodation, transportation and other expenses during his university stay. Lao Wang disagreed with Xiao Wangs monthly maintenance and other expenses on the grounds that he was an adult and could live independently. It was also found that Lao Wangs current income was about 7,000 yuan. The court of first instance ruled that Lao Wang paid maintenance fee of 2,000 yuan per month. Lao Wang refused and appealed to the First Intermediate Court of Beijing.

Can live independently and refuse to appeal

The trial of Beijing No. 1 Middle Court held that, according to the Marriage Law, when parents fail to fulfil their maintenance obligations, children under age or unable to live independently have the right to ask their parents to pay maintenance fees. Xiao Wang was 18 years old when he filed a lawsuit in this case. He was not a minor, and the maintenance fee he advocated was also the fee after he was 18 years old. Therefore, whether Xiao Wangs claim can be established depends on whether Xiao Wang belongs to the children who can not live independently.

As for the definition of children who can not live independently, the children who can not live independently stipulated in the Marriage Law refers to adult children who are still in high school or below, or who have lost or have not completely lost their ability to work and are unable to maintain their normal life for subjective reasons. From the point of view of this regulation, the academic qualifications of children who are still in school are limited to high school and below. In this case, Xiaowang has graduated from high school and is in the University stage, so he does not meet the requirements of this article.

Since the judicial interpretation is made after the implementation of the amended Marriage Law, and the interpretation clearly stipulates that if the relevant judicial interpretation made by the Supreme Peoples Court before conflicts with this interpretation, the interpretation shall prevail, so the provisions of Interpretation 1 of Marriage Law should be applied in this case. Xiao Wang is not a child who can not live independently, because he has completed high school education and has not lost the ability to work, and is a person with the ability to conduct civil affairs. Accordingly, the Beijing First Intermediate Court rendered a final judgment and reversed Xiao Wangs claim. At the same time, the Judge of the First Intermediate Court of Beijing reminded us that although most parents still regard it as their responsibility to provide living and education expenses for their children who are educated in Universities on the basis of their emotions, morals and habits, it is their parentsmoral choice, not their legal obligation. Adult college students who enjoy the support of their parents should be grateful. At the same time, as adult college students, learning to survive and self-reliance is the most basic skills, and they should take responsibility for their own choices and behaviors. Source: Beijing Morning Post Responsible Editor: Ji Guojie_NBJ11143

Since the judicial interpretation is made after the implementation of the amended Marriage Law, and the interpretation clearly stipulates that if the relevant judicial interpretation made by the Supreme Peoples Court before conflicts with this interpretation, the interpretation shall prevail, so the provisions of Interpretation 1 of Marriage Law should be applied in this case. Xiao Wang is not a child who can not live independently, because he has completed high school education and has not lost the ability to work, and is a person with the ability to conduct civil affairs.

Accordingly, the Beijing First Intermediate Court rendered a final judgment and reversed Xiao Wangs claim.

At the same time, the Judge of the First Intermediate Court of Beijing reminded us that although most parents still regard it as their responsibility to provide living and education expenses for their children who are educated in Universities on the basis of their emotions, morals and habits, it is their parentsmoral choice, not their legal obligation. Adult college students who enjoy the support of their parents should be grateful. At the same time, as adult college students, learning to survive and self-reliance is the most basic skills, and they should take responsibility for their own choices and behaviors.