Husband's Appeal of Separation Decree Denied Due to Concurrent Concubinage Finding and Lack of Counterclaim
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe appeal challenged a decision granting separation of the bodies to the wife, arguing the lower court erred by not addressing a piece of evidence produced for the first time on appeal that allegedly proved the wife's adultery; however, the Court of Cassation upheld the decision because the appellate court had based its ruling on its adoption of the trial court's finding that the husband had been living in concubinage for several years, a finding which was not subject to review, and the appellate court was not required to respond to the husband's specific evidence since he had not filed a counterclaim.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAHusband's Appeal of Separation Decree Denied Due to Concurrent Concubinage Finding and Lack of Counterclaim: The appeal challenged a decision granting separation of the bodies to the wife, arguing the lower court erred by not addressing a piece of evidence produced for the first time on appeal that allegedly proved the wife's adultery; however, the Court of Cassation upheld the decision because the appellate court had based its ruling on its adoption of the trial court's finding that the husband had been living in concubinage for several years, a finding which was not subject to review, and the appellate court was not required to respond to the husband's specific evidence since he had not filed a counterclaim.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IATexte complet
SUR LE MOYEN UNIQUE : ATTENDU QU'IL EST FAIT REPROCHE A L'ARRET CONFIRMATIF ATTAQUE D'AVOIR PRONONCE LA SEPARATION DE CORPS, AU PROFIT DE DAME X..., SANS FAIRE ALLUSION A UN CONSTAT, PRODUIT, POUR LA PREMIERE FOIS, DEVANT LA COUR D'APPEL ET QUI ETABLISSAIT L'ADULTERE DE LA FEMME ;
MAIS ATTENDU QUE LE JUGEMENT ENTREPRIS, DONT LES MOTIFS ONT ETE ADOPTES, ENONCE QUE LA SUSNOMMEE AVAIT RAPPORTE LA PREUVE QUE SON MARI, VIVAIT, DEPUIS PLUSIEURS ANNEES EN CONCUBINAGE AVEC UNE DAME H F - ;
QU'EN L'ETAT DE CETTE ENONCIATION QUI ECHAPPE AU CONTROLE DE LA COUR DE CASSATION, LA COUR D'APPEL QUI, N'ETANT PAS SAISIE D'UNE DEMANDE RECONVENTIONNELLE DE X..., N'ETAIT PAS TENUE DE REPONDRE A CE DERNIER CONCERNANT LEDIT CONSTAT, LA PRODUCTION DE CELUI-CI NE CONSTITUANT, EN L'ESPECE, QU'UN ARGUMENT DESTINE A METTRE EN DOUTE LA VALEUR PROBANTE DE CERTAINS TEMOIGNAGES ;
D'OU IL SUIT QUE LE MOYEN N'EST PAS FONDE ;
PAR CES MOTIFS : REJETTE LE POURVOI FORME CONTRE L'ARRET RENDU LE 28 FEVRIER 1961 PAR LA COUR D'APPEL D'AIX-EN-PROVENCE. N° 61 - 12 080 X... C/ DAME X.... PRESIDENT : M CAMBOULIVES - RAPPORTEUR : M VASSART - AVOCAT GENERAL : M ALBUCHER - AVOCATS : MM TETREAU ET MAYER. A RAPPROCHER : 15 FEVRIER 1961, BULL 1961, II, N° 125, P 91. 19 AVRIL 1961, BULL 1961, II, N° 280, P 204. 26 MAI 1961, BULL 1961, II, N° 375, P 270. 21 JUIN 1961, BULL 1961, II, N° 474, P 338 ET L'ARRET CITE.