The Court for Violence Against Women in Santa Cruz de Tenerife has dissolved a marriage and ended the compensatory payment of 750 euros that the woman had been receiving for 15 years, as established in the July 2010 separation ruling. This decision was made after it was proven that the recipient had a stable romantic relationship and was living with another person, which legally justified ending the financial benefit, as noted in the judgment.
In April 2024, a new legal process began to request a final divorce and revise the previously agreed measures—specifically, the ceasing of the compensatory payment, as sought by the ex-husband and represented by lawyer Alfonso Delgado. Despite the woman denying cohabitation with a new partner, evidence was provided that contradicted her claim, leading to the financial benefit she had enjoyed for nearly three decades being terminated in the divorce ruling.
Private Detective Report
The claim was supported by a comprehensive report from a private detective agency, documenting over several months—from September 2023 to March 2024—numerous visits by the ex-wife’s new partner to a residence, overnight stays, and outings together. The report included neighbours’ testimonies confirming regular presence at the home and shared activities such as shopping trips, dining out, even using the same vehicle, and receiving mail in her name at the man’s house.
In addition to the detective report, invoices and receipts for building materials and photographs of renovations at the residence shared by the woman and her new partner were presented. Additionally, a former son-in-law of the litigants testified, confirming the relationship since at least 2012, reinforcing evidence of a stable, lasting cohabitation.
Judge Luz Alicia Casañas Cabrera highlighted in the ruling the evolution of the “marital cohabitation” concept under Supreme Court doctrine, emphasising that a stable relationship with someone else can legitimately end the right to a compensatory payment. Besides granting the divorce request and terminating the compensation, the court ordered the defendant to pay the legal costs, as their claims were rejected.
Subscribe to continue reading.
