Dominican Republic

The defendant was convicted of assault, violence against women, and domestic violence.

The appellant challenged a lower court ruling granting the respondent, his ex-partner, an equitable division of marital assets (bienes de la comunidad de hecho) upon the dissolution of their relationship.  The appellant argued that 1) the court erroneously found the relationship to be a “common law marriage” (unión more uxurio) and 2) regardless of the character of the relationship, the appellant was the sole owner of the assets at issue as the respondent did not work outside the home.  The appellant and the respondent had been in a monogamous, cohabiting relationship for 17 years

The respondent was employed by the appellant, Property Center Bienes Raíces, as the secretary of the owner, Taylan Ozdemir, for approximately four years.  When the respondent was three months pregnant, she experienced a health issue threatening her pregnancy and presented a doctor’s note to her employer stating that she could not work for 10 days and had to rest at home.  Four days later, she returned to her office to return a work laptop for the use of her co-worker who was filling in while she was absent.  According to the co-worker’s testimony, the appellant-owner began to

Case Number: SCJ-SS-23-1142 

The Supreme Court's Criminal Chamber determined that the crime of violence against women includes discriminatory acts based on gender that cause physical harm or suffering, through the use of physical force, psychological or verbal violence, or intimidation or persecution.

Mrs. Angela Merici Mendoza Minier challenged the constitutionality of Article 35 of Law number 1306-Bis published on May 21^st, 1937, which provided that a divorced woman could not marry within 10 months after the divorce. Mrs. Angela argued that Article 35 contravened the gender equality provision provided in Article 39 of the Constitution because the 10-month waiting period to remarry did not apply to men. Article 35 thus conferred a privilege only to men. The attorney-general disregarded the action on the basis that the petitioner lacked legitimate interest.

The foundations “Justicia y Transparencia”, “Transparencia y Democracia” and “Matrimonio Feliz” challenged the constitutionality of Articles 107, 108, 109 and 110 of the Criminal Code Law 550-14. Law 550-14 regulates abortion, including the adjudication of cases of exoneration from criminal liability such as the interruption of pregnancy based on the crimes of rape, incest or malformations of the embryo that may endanger life.

Due to the increase of femicide crimes in the Dominican society, the Constitutional Court proclaimed the termination of violence against women in all its forms as it is a violation of the Constitution. The proclamation was made in commemoration of the murder of Mirabal, Minerva, Patria and María Teresa, political opponents of the regime of Rafael Trujillo, and in accordance with the international agreements executed in defense of women's rights, as well as the laws issued against gender violence, sexual violence and femicide.