Argentina

The plaintiff daughters, R.H. and V.C., filed suit against the State government and certain police officials requesting damages for the loss of the lives of their mother, Mrs. S., and father, Mr. A.  The day after her decision to flee her home together with her daughters and reside with other family members, Mrs. S. filed a civil proceeding against Mr. A. for domestic violence.  Mr. A. was prohibited from approaching Mrs. S. and his daughters, and Mrs. S.

A.F. sought an abortion for her 15-year-old daughter, A.G., whose stepfather raped and impregnated her.  The courts of first and second instance rejected A.F.’s petition because Argentina’s criminal code permits abortion in cases of sexual assault of a mentally impaired woman and A.G.

M.P.B. suffered repeated domestic violence and abuse at the hands of her husband R.A.G. In civil suit, M.P.B. was granted exclusive control of the spousal home and custody of her children. The court imposed a restraining order on R.A.G.; he was unable to go within 300 meters of the family home, his wife’s work, or the 9 and 12 year-old children’s school. This case is fairly punitive toward the father by Argentinean standards. The judge cited both Argentinean statutes and international human rights law in arriving at her decision.

The victim was twelve to thirteen years old when she had sexual relations with the defendant. There was no presumption of sexual immaturity. It had to be proven by evidence and expert testimony. In this case, the testimony of experts, text message evidence, and the testimony of the victim demonstrated that she was not mature enough to consent to sex. While the outcome of this case was a positive one, the general Argentinean attitude towards statutory rape is not: sexual immaturity must be proven regardless of age.

Mr. M. R. committed successive acts of violence and made threats against his wife, Mrs. F.M.S.  Upon finding that the declarations made by Ms. F.M.S., photographs and medical reports constituted sufficient probative evidence, the court determined that Mr. M. R. committed simple aggravated assault based on the relationship between the parties and that the threats made against Mrs. F.M.S. were grave and imminent.  Accordingly, the court found sufficient cause to hold the defendant in preventative confinement.

Defendant Mr. H.R.A was convicted of aggravated homicide based on his prior ties and relationship with the victim, Ms. N.A. (his partner), whom he murdered with a gun.  Mr. H.RA. was sentenced to life in prison pursuant to Law No.

Articles 172, 402, and 509 of the Civil and Commercial Code protect same-sex marriage and civil unions in Argentina. Before the new, combined Civil and Commercial Code was promulgated in 2014, Law 26618 codified marriage equality by amending Article 172 of the then-current Civil Code (among other amendments), which provides that marriage has the same requirements and effects, regardless of the sex of the parties.

Article 19 of the Argentine Civil and Commercial Code provides that legal existence begins at conception. Article 20 establishes a rebuttable presumption that pregnancy lasts no more than 300 days and no fewer than 180 days, not counting the day of birth. Article 21 states that the rights and obligations of a conceived or implanted person vest irrevocably if the child is born alive. If the child is not born alive, the law treats the person as never having existed. The law presumes live birth unless proven otherwise.

Articles 2433 through 2437 ensure that a spouse has intestate inheritance rights. Article 2433 allows the surviving spouse to receive the same share as a child, if descendants inherit. If ascendants inherit, Article 2434 allows the surviving spouse to receive half the inheritance. If neither descendants nor ascendants inherit, Article 2435 allows the surviving spouse to inherit the entire estate, excluding any collateral relatives.

Articles 2444 through 2461 outline Argentina’s forced heirship system. The system vests certain individuals with the right to succeed the decedent and have certain portions of the decedent´s estate reserved for them, regardless of the decedent’s testamentary instrument or testamentary gifts. Article 2444 defines such forced heirs as including descendants, ascendants, and spouses.