Facts
In divorce proceedings, the court ordered the judicial separation of the spouses for a period of one year, ordered the husband to pay a monthly maintenance allowance to the wife, and awarded her a procedural indemnity. The wife subsequently initiated enforcement proceedings to recover the unpaid procedural indemnity. The husband opposed this enforcement, invoking the prohibition of forced execution between spouses provided for in Art. 173 CC.
The supervisory authorities annulled the payment order, considering that the procedural indemnity did not constitute a "subsidy" within the meaning of Art. 176 para. 2 CC, which is an exception to the prohibition of forced execution between spouses. The wife appealed against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that the procedural indemnity awarded to a spouse against the other, whether in the context of divorce proceedings (Art. 145 CC), protection of the conjugal union (Art. 170 CC) or judicial separation, must be considered a "subsidy" within the meaning of Art. 176 para. 2 CC and therefore excluded from the prohibition of forced execution between spouses.
Indeed, the purpose of this prohibition, which is to preserve marital peace, no longer…