Facts
The appellant, [X.] , was placed under the parental authority of her mother during the divorce of her parents in 1996. Her father, [Y.] (the respondent), fulfilled his maintenance obligation according to the divorce judgment until July 2000. On 16 September 2004, [X.] filed a claim against her father for payment of adult maintenance retroactively from 1 February 2004. At the same time, she filed a request for legal aid, which was dismissed. She then requested that the respondent be ordered to pay an advance on procedural costs, which was also rejected. The High Court of the Canton of Aargau justified the rejection on the grounds that the appellant had broken off personal contact with her father shortly after the divorce and had not resumed it even as an adult, so that her claim for adult maintenance appeared to be manifestly unfounded.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court confirmed the decisions of the lower instances. It stated that the appellant had not fulfilled her procedural due diligence obligations and had not credibly demonstrated the requirements for the payment of an advance on procedural costs. According to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, an advance on procedural costs can only be…