Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant ([A.] ): Swiss, born 1963, represented by attorney Hanspeter Kümin.
  • Respondent ([B.] ): From Brazil, born 1987, represented by attorney Judith Berlinger.

Facts:

  • The parties had their partnership registered on 23 August 2019.
  • On 14 November 2019, they jointly applied for the dissolution of the partnership.
  • On 8 January 2020, [A.] additionally sued for the invalidity of the partnership.
  • [B.] applied for interim measures, including a retroactive monthly maintenance contribution.
  • On 3 February 2020, the District Court of Zurich ordered [A.] to pay [B.] a monthly maintenance contribution of CHF 2,430.-- from 27 September 2019.
  • The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich reduced the maintenance to CHF 2,430.-- between 27 September 2019 and 30 April 2020 and to CHF 2,230.-- from 1 May 2020.
  • [A.] filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the Higher Court's decision and dismiss the application for interim measures.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court first examines the admissibility of the appeal. It establishes that this is a final decision under Art. 90 FSCA, as interim measures during the proceedings for the dissolution of the partnership procedurally close the instance and concern a different subject than the main proceedings. The appellant is entitled to appeal under Art. 76 para. 1 FSCA, which he has also filed in time.

The Federal Supreme Court then addresses the maintenance obligation. It establishes that the maintenance obligation between registered partners is based on Art. 13 SSPA throughout the entire duration of the registered partnership according to the majority of legal doctrine. The Higher Court did not act arbitrarily by considering Art. 13 SSPA as the basis for the appellant's maintenance obligation.

The Federal Supreme Court further examines whether the respondent's claim for maintenance should be denied due to the lack of a joint household. It establishes that the parties only maintained a joint household for a very short time, namely approximately two months. Nevertheless, the partnership has also affected the living conditions of the parties, namely the respondent, even considering its short duration, and the partners have not remained completely independent…