Polish law provides mechanisms for recovering child support payments made for non-biological children, though practical challenges exist.
Presumption of Paternity by the Mother’s Husband – What You Should Know
Polish law establishes a presumption of paternity by the mother’s husband. In practice, this means that if a woman is pregnant and married, her husband is automatically listed as the father on the birth certificate. This cannot be prevented.
If the mother is unmarried, the father can acknowledge the child before the head of the civil registry office. However, if there is no agreement between the parents regarding this matter, a court proceeding is initiated to establish paternity.
When Does the Child Support Obligation Arise and What Are the Consequences for Non-Payment?
Parents are obligated to care for the child’s development. This also involves bearing the costs of raising the child until it can support itself independently.
It may happen that a father (or mother) will have a child support obligation that they must fulfill. If they fail to do so, they may face enforcement by bailiffs, fines, restrictions, and even imprisonment.
Child Support for a Child That Isn’t Mine – Can the Money Be Recovered?
The situation becomes complicated when the man listed on the birth certificate is not the biological father and has been paying child support for another person’s child for some time. Although the law provides certain mechanisms through which he can recover the money paid, in practice they make little difference.
If it turns out that child support was paid for a child for whom paternity was denied, the man may seek to have these payments retroactively invalidated. However, in judicial practice, the concept of the child’s best interest predominates, which requires providing the child with current maintenance funds, even if it was a man who was not the child’s biological father who supported them.
Reimbursement of Child Support from the Biological Father – Is This Possible?
This means that a man recovering already paid child support for another person’s son or daughter may prove impossible. As the attorney reminds, the essence of an unjustly performed benefit is that it constitutes an unjust enrichment of the person who receives such a benefit. In this case, the child who received the child support.
The defendant, however, can defend themselves with the argument that they used the benefit and are no longer enriched. In the case of child support, this is justified to the extent that these are funds, as a rule, for current maintenance and are used up on an ongoing basis.
The Mother’s Lie About Paternity and Criminal Liability
Interestingly, in such a case, the situation of the child’s mother looks favorable. When paternity results from presumption, the woman cannot be held responsible for stating in civil status records that the man is not the biological father of the child.
If paternity was acknowledged before the head of the civil registry office, i.e., when the man is not the mother’s husband, the woman also makes a statement in which she confirms the paternity of this man, but it is not made with a warning of criminal liability. This means that she cannot be held liable for making a false statement.
In theory, one could try to prove fraud against the mother, as referred to in Art. 286 of the Penal Code or obtaining a false certificate (Art. 272 of the Penal Code). In practice, however, this would require proving to the child’s mother that her conduct met the characteristics of such acts, which is difficult and often even impossible.
