Divorce is already a delicate and complex moment in itself. But what happens when, after having received a divorce allowance for months or even years, it is discovered that the contribution should never have been granted in the first place? The answer of the Corte di Cassazione — with ordinanza n. 1999 of 29 January 2026 — is clear and in some respects striking: the sums must be repaid, in full.
A ruling that deserves close attention, as it redraws the boundaries of post-matrimonial economic protection and imposes on the party seeking the divorce allowance a precise and rigorous burden of proof.
The Case: €500 per Month and Then a Complete Reversal on Appeal
The matter originated from divorce proceedings before the Tribunale di Rimini. The court of first instance had recognised a divorce allowance of €500 per month in favour of the former wife, grounding its decision essentially on the basis of a difference in income between the two former spouses.
On appeal, however, the situation was completely reversed. The second-instance judges established that a fundamental element was missing: the so-called causal link between the choices made during the marriage and the economic disadvantage alleged by the applicant. In other words, it had not been demonstrated that the former wife's deteriorated economic circumstances were attributable to any renunciations or sacrifices made in the course of married life.
Consequently, the Corte d'appello did not merely deny the allowance going forward: it also declared that the sums already paid by the former husband were required to be repaid in full.
Why a Mere Difference in Income Is Not Sufficient
One of the most significant aspects of this ruling concerns the manner in which the Cassazione frames the prerequisites for the divorce allowance. Many incorrectly believe that it is sufficient to demonstrate that one of the two former spouses earns more than the other in order to obtain financial support. This is not the case.
The most recent case law requires something more nuanced. It is necessary to prove that:
- there exists a concrete economic disparity between the two former spouses;
- such disparity is causally linked to the choices made during the marriage (for example, having given up a career in order to care for the children or to support the partner);
- the applicant is unable to achieve economic self-sufficiency for reasons directly connected to those very sacrifices.
In the case under examination, the former wife had neither pleaded nor even raised the possibility of this causal link. This omission proved to be decisive.
Repayment of Sums: When It Applies and Why
The most sensitive aspect of the decision concerns the recoverability of sums already received. The Corte di Cassazione confirmed that, where on appeal it is established that the conditions for granting the divorce allowance were never met from the outset — that is, where the original ruling was incorrect — the obligation to repay arises fully and without exception.