-Invoking the critical legal arguments and highlighting the appropriate facts, the Athens Single-Member Court of First Instance issued its important and particularly legal decision of 18.3.2021, in which it rejected the petitioner wife’s request for a temporary injunction against her husband for his relocation, the award of custody and child support.
The petitioner, in her application filed with the Athens Single Judge Court of First Instance (Insurance Measures Procedure) sought the granting of a temporary injunction for:
removal of her husband from the family home owned by her and his relocation to an existing home.Awarding temporary custody of their minor child to her, and payment of temporary maintenance by the respondent spouse to their minor child.
In particular, the applicant stated in her application that there was an immediate and urgent need for the husband to leave the family home, stating in her application that their continued cohabitation would lead to a particularly dysfunctional situation, which would cause her additional problems, quarrels and disputes, and that the defendant’s conduct constituted a form of domestic violence, alleging incidents that allegedly occurred between the husband and their minor child.
On the basis of what was set out by the partner of our office and attorney for the respondent husband, both orally during the discussion of the interim order before the Court, and in his note in which he submitted legal assertions on the unsubstantiated legal basis of the wife’s application and factual assertions on what the petitioner claimed in her application, it was established that there was no immediate and urgent need for the husband to leave the family home and that the husband’s conduct did not constitute a form of domestic violence, since none of the documents and the evidence relied on by the applicant’s lawyer at the hearing before the Court of Justice substantiated the applicant’s factual and legal claims.
On the basis of the foregoing, the Athens Single Judge Court of First Instance rejected the applicant’s application for a temporary injunction, as it was not considered that there were such serious and urgent reasons to order the removal of the defendant husband from the family home, thus rendering the application for a temporary injunction for the award of custody and the determination of maintenance for their minor child as devoid of purpose.
