Facts
K.L.-S. and M.L. were married on 12 June 1997. During the night of 23 to 24 November 1997, M.L. violently beat K.L.-S. for several hours. K.L.-S. left the marital home on 24 November 1997 and has since been living separately from her husband. On 26 November 1997, she consulted a doctor who found several bruises and contusions. From 8 to 17 December 1997, she was hospitalized in psychiatry and then underwent outpatient psychiatric treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. On 30 September 1998, K.L.-S. filed for divorce with the district court, invoking the former Art. 142 CC. The district court granted the request. M.L. appealed. On appeal, K.L.-S. based her request on Art. 115 CC. The Court of Appeal upheld the divorce request. M.L. filed a nullity appeal at the cantonal level and a reform appeal to the Federal Court.Considerations
The Federal Court notes that Art. 115 CC, which allows for divorce due to the intolerable continuation of the marriage, must be interpreted more restrictively than the former Art. 142(1) CC on deep-seated disunion. However, this restrictive interpretation rule must not lead to inequitable results. Art. 115 CC aims to assess whether the maintenance of the legal bond is psychologically and emotionally bearable for the spouse, and no longer just the intolerance of cohabitation.
In the present case, the Federal Court considers that the serious and repeated physical violence exercised by M.L. against…