A Polish court ruled a father’s consistent direct support of his children, despite alimony arrears, negated criminal liability for non-payment.
Alimony Arrears and Criminal Liability
A Polish court considered the case of a man facing charges for nearly ten months of unpaid court-ordered alimony for his two minor daughters. The total arrears equaled at least three periodic benefits.
Article 209 of the Polish Penal Code addresses criminal responsibility for failing to pay court-ordered alimony. It stipulates that individuals with arrears equivalent to at least three periodic benefits, or delays exceeding three months for non-periodic payments, may face fines or imprisonment for up to one year.
“Evasion” of Alimony Obligations in Practice
The Kalisz Regional Court determined the man was not guilty of violating Article 209. Both legal doctrine and case law require proof of a deliberate refusal to fulfill the obligation when the payer has the objective means to do so.
The court emphasized that “evasion” implies a negative psychological attitude and a conscious decision not to fulfill the obligation, despite the ability to do so, and this must be demonstrated with evidence.
Father Provides Direct Support, Court Examines “Bad Faith”
The court acknowledged formal alimony arrears but found no evidence of evasion. The man actively participated in his children’s lives, providing for their needs, buying gifts, and establishing savings accounts for them.
He bypassed direct payment to the mother due to concerns about her alcohol abuse and the potential misuse of funds. The court concluded there was no evidence of a negative or dismissive attitude towards fulfilling his obligations.
Circumstances Excluding Criminal Responsibility
The court noted established legal precedents where criminal charges under Article 209 are not applicable, including imprisonment, unemployment without benefits, lack of job offers, or illness preventing work.
Ongoing enforcement proceedings unrelated to alimony, or existing public law debts, can also preclude criminal liability. The court stressed that this list is not exhaustive and each case must be assessed individually.
Minimal Social Harm and Fulfillment of Parental Duties
Even if the formal requirements for a violation were met, the court found the offense would have minimal social harm, as the man consistently provided financial stability and met his children’s needs.
The court concluded that the man had not violated his fundamental parental obligations.
