Facts
This case concerns the divorce between A.A. and B.A., a couple of French nationality. On November 3, 2014, the District Court in particular ordered that B.A. pay A.A. a monthly pension of 2,000 francs until his retirement. Both spouses appealed against this judgment before the Vaud Cantonal Court.
On March 12, 2015, B.A. filed a memorandum modifying his appeal conclusions, in particular requesting that A.A. pay him a higher amount for the liquidation of the matrimonial regime. A copy of this memorandum was transmitted to A.A. for information.
By judgment of April 1, 2015, the Cantonal Court partially upheld B.A.'s appeal and took into account the modified conclusions in its judgment.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal upheld A.A.'s appeal against this judgment. It considered that the Cantonal Court had violated A.A.'s right to be heard by ruling on B.A.'s modified conclusions without first setting a deadline for A.A. to respond to them.
Indeed, when a party modifies its conclusions on appeal, the opposing party must have the opportunity to respond to these new conclusions. The appellate judge cannot simply transmit the modified conclusions for information only, but must set a deadline for…