family law

Under Pennsylvania law, a divorce can be either “fault-based” or “no-fault.” Grounds for a “fault-based” divorce include the following: abandonment (unmoving spouse has left the home) without a reasonable cause for a period of one or more years; adultery; cruel and barbarous treatment (unmoving spouse has treated movant in a way that puts his/her life or health at risk); bigamy (movant’s spouse married movant without first divorcing his/her spouse); imprisonment for two or more years; or movant’s spouse has acted in a way that made movant’s life unbearable or extremely difficult.

In Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C., 28 N.Y.3d 1 (2016), a non-biological parent in a same-sex relationship sought custody and visitation after their relationship had ended. Under previous precedent (Alison D. v. Virginia M. (77 NY2d 651 [1991])) only biological or adoptive parents were recognized.

The petitioner, a domestic violence survivor, could not find affordable legal assistance to appear before a court.  The Court ruled that member states must guarantee effective access to the courts, including access to counsel.

The Venezuelan Civil Code (1982) sets forth rules on divorce, marriage, property, and succession. Article 185 lists the grounds for divorce, including adultery, physical or psychological abuse, abandonment, and marital rape. It also recognizes as serious grounds conspiracy by a spouse to corrupt or prostitute the other or the children, as well as collusion in such conduct. Article 185-A allows either spouse to petition for divorce after a de facto separation of more than five years, without proving fault or a specific cause.

Article 173 criminalizes incest, defined as sexual relations between persons over the age of 18 who are related either directly related (vínculo filial) or collaterally, up to the second degree of consanguinity. The offense is punishable by one to three years of imprisonment. A distinctive feature of this provision is that criminal action may be extinguished if the victim grants forgiveness, which operates as a bar to prosecution.

In Cole v. Cole, 35 N.Y.3d 1012 (2020), the New York Court of Appeals reviewed a mother’s challenge to a custody award favoring the father under Domestic Relations Law § 240(1)(a).

Section 53a-190 defines bigamy as knowingly marrying or purporting to marry another person while already legally married, or knowingly cohabiting as spouses with someone who is married to another. The offense applies whether the subsequent marriage is performed within or outside the state of Connecticut if the parties then live together in the state as spouses. The statute provides several affirmative defenses to prevent conviction where the conduct results from mistake or circumstances beyond the actor’s control.

The Venezuelan Constitution provides a broad framework for family protection, equality, and non-discrimination. Article 75 declares that the State protects the family as the natural and fundamental unit of society, based on equality and mutual respect among its members. Children and adolescents have the right to a family and identity, preferably within their family of origin; if that is not possible, they are entitled to substitute family care, with national adoption prioritized over international adoption.

The Political Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala recognizes the equality of all persons and provides specific protections for women and families. Article 4 states that all human beings are free and equal in dignity and rights, and that men and women, regardless of marital status, have equal rights and responsibilities.

The appellant sued his ex-wife, the respondent, regarding the division of property acquired during the marriage as the ex-spouses’ joint property. The appellant noted that during their marriage, the spouses accumulated funds that were kept in the respondent’s bank account. However, immediately after the divorce, the respondent independently managed the funds and bought an apartment. The appellant’s main argument was that, according to Ukrainian family law, the dissolution of marriage does not terminate the right of joint co-ownership of property acquired during the marriage.