Estimated reading time (in minutes)

Conjugal consent According to the Court of Cassation, a spouse cannot challenge a change of matrimonial regime that he has previously accepted, unless he can invoke fraud or a lack of consent. The mere fact that the new regime may turn out to be disadvantageous for one of the spouses is not a sufficient ground for annulment.

Acceptance and limits: contesting changes in matrimonial regime  : –

In one specific case, two spouses had initially married under the regime of separation of property, as specified in their marriage contract. However, after two years, they decide to modify their matrimonial regime by adding a partnership of acquests. In this new regime, only the husband contributed present assets and future acquisitions, while the wife did not contribute to the expansion of this “partnership”.

Shortly after the change, the husband changed his mind and asked for the new diet to be canceled, arguing that it was excessively unfavorable to him. The Court of Appeal granted his request, ruling that the change was not in accordance with the best interests of the family as required by the Civil Code.

Bound by consent: the binding nature of matrimonial property regimes  : –

However, the Court of Cassation expressed its disagreement with the judgment, pointing out that once a change of matrimonial regime is adopted, it becomes obligatory for both spouses. Thus, unless a lack of consent or fraud is proven, neither of the spouses can request its annulment.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of spousal consent and the finality of decisions concerning matrimonial property regimes. It reinforces the principle that spouses should carefully consider the consequences of a proposed change before agreeing to it, as they will be bound by its terms unless special circumstances justify its reversal.