The couple had separated. The dog, purchased during the marriage was agreed with the husband. Now the wife requested the district court for a legal aid application, you give the right to the common dog Z. ..., born ...., a week on Tuesdays and Fridays during the period from 16.30 bis 20.30 clock to clock . use The district court denied the motion for authorization to use legal aid. On the other hand, the complaint brought by the Higher Regional Court of Hamm in its order dated 11.19.2010, II-10 WF decided 240/10 (Beck RS 2010, 30 575).
The Court of Appeals first determined that an appropriate application of the rules on the allocation of household items would be considered, because the applicant was no assignment of the dog, but only a temporary right of use.
The request was worded in a similar, like a parental access to children - except for the "use". The OLG entered the contrary, however, and declared that an analogy to forbid the legal handling rules. The rights are oriented on the interests of the child. But here it related to the emotional needs of a divisive party to a jointly held Dog. For an animal could only rules on the distribution of household items are used according to (an animal is not a thing, so no direct application of the rules for the household distribution). With these rules there is not a "handling rules". Other legal bases for the enforcement of the claim of the wife would also not considered.
With all due understanding of the importance of a dog you have to ask here whether such procedures are necessary. The courts should have more essential tasks. (Copyright ago)
0 comments:
Post a Comment