Facts

Parties:

  • [A.] (appellant), represented by attorney Dr. Markus Bachmann,
  • [B.] (respondent), represented by attorney Dr. Matthias Müller.

Facts:

  • Divorce agreement dated November 2, 2007, approved by the District Court of Zurich on January 25, 2008, obligated [A.] to pay child support to his daughter [B.] until the completion of an appropriate education.
  • With a submission dated July 25, 2019, [A.] applied to the Justice of the Peace Office of Willisau for a declaration that he owed no maintenance to his daughter, as she was not pursuing a mandatory initial education.
  • The District Court of Willisau and the Cantonal Court of Lucerne dismissed the claim or the appeal, respectively, as they denied the local jurisdiction of the District Court of Willisau.

Legal requests:

  • Declaration that [A.] owes no maintenance to his adult daughter.
  • Alternatively, amendment of the maintenance obligation in the divorce judgment.

Considerations

The cantonal authorities did not enter into the appellant's claim, as they denied the local jurisdiction of the District Court of Willisau. The Federal Supreme Court examined the admissibility of the appeal and found that a reformatory decision was not in question, as the cantonal authorities had not dealt substantively with the claim. The alternative request to remit the case to the District Court of Willisau is admissible.

The local jurisdiction of the District Court of Willisau is disputed. The appellant argued that Art. 26 CPC provides for the jurisdiction of the court at the residence of one of the parties. However, the Federal Supreme Court found that Art. 26 CPC only applies to independent maintenance claims by children against their parents and not to claims by a parent against their…