Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.A.] (born 1959), represented by attorney Michael Franz Zimmermann
  • Respondent: [B.A.] (born 1977), represented by attorney Céline Hofer

Facts:

  • [A.A.] and [B.A.] married in 2007 and have three sons: [C.A.] (born 2009), [D.A.] (born 2012), and [E.A.] (born 2015).
  • After a restructuring, [A.A.] was retired early in 2017.
  • In January 2018, [B.A.] left the family home in [U.] with the children and moved to [V.] for cancer treatment.
  • Both spouses have entered into new relationships.
  • On April 4, 2018, [B.A.] applied to the District Court of St. Gallen for measures for living apart, which were regulated on November 13, 2018.
  • The Cantonal Court of St. Gallen partially amended this regulation and obligated [A.A.] to higher maintenance contributions.
  • [A.A.] filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court, which was decided on June 21, 2021.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court examined the appeal of [A.A.] against the decision of the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen. The main points of the examination were the territorial jurisdiction of the St. Gallen courts, the allocation of custody, the regulation of visitation and vacation rights, and the amount of maintenance contributions.

First, the territorial jurisdiction of the St. Gallen courts was confirmed, as the respondent has her residence in [V.] and the District Court of St. Gallen was competent for the marital protection application. The arguments of the appellant regarding the lack of jurisdiction were dismissed as unfounded.

In the allocation of custody, it was established that both parents are capable of raising children and that the current living situation of the children in Eastern Switzerland speaks in favor of allocating custody to the respondent. The hearings of the children confirmed that the mother is the main reference person and that the children feel comfortable in…