Estimated reading time (in minutes)
Parental Divorce Liability: Child’s Residence and Responsibility
In the event of divorce, under article 1384 of the Civil Code, the responsibility rests with the sole parent with whom the habitual residence of the child has been determined.
A thirteen-year-old child whose parents were divorced had caused the fire and the total destruction of a municipal gymnasium. The Court of Appeal had condemned the parents of the child jointly and severally, under their civil liability, to compensate the municipality. The father challenged this decision on the grounds that he incurred no liability, since the child did not live with him. The Court of Cassation agreed with him. It considers that in this case the responsibility rests solely with the parent with whom the habitual residence of the child has been fixed, even when the other parent holds a right of access and accommodation and jointly exercises the parental authority. Therefore, for the latter to be held liable, he would have to have himself committed a fault in supervising the child. Liability in the event of alternating residence of the child is not dealt with here.
Remember that parents are jointly and severally liable for damages caused by their minor child. This is an automatic responsibility. The child’s behavior need not be at fault. Only force majeure or the fault of the victim can exempt them.
Court of Cassation’s Ruling on Divorced Parents’ Liability
The Court of Cassation issued a significant ruling on the liability of divorced parents in a case involving a thirteen-year-old child who caused a fire and complete destruction of a municipal gymnasium. The Court clarified that under Article 1384 of the Civil Code, the responsibility lies with the sole parent with whom the child’s habitual residence has been established.
In this specific case, the Court of Appeal had jointly and severally condemned both parents, under their civil liability, to compensate the municipality. However, the father contested this decision, arguing that he should not be held liable since the child did not reside with him. The Court of Cassation agreed with the father, stating that the responsibility solely rests with the parent with whom the child resides habitually, even if the other parent has visitation rights and jointly exercises parental authority. The non-residential parent can only be held liable if they have committed a fault in supervising the child.
It is important to note that parents are jointly and severally liable for damages caused by their minor child, regardless of the child’s behavior. Only force majeure or the fault of the victim can exempt the parents from liability.
Law Firm DAMY 2022
