Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
22 97 12 93 • KG LU 22 97 12 93 AI generated

Appeal Withdrawal Does Not Terminate Cross-Appeal on Spousal Support

Case Number 22 97 12 93
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Canton of Lucerne (CH-LU)
Decision Date
Open official source Entscheidsuche mirror Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The appellant filed an appeal against a divorce decree seeking the annulment of his spousal support obligation, to which the respondent filed a cross-appeal seeking a different spousal support amount; when the appellant subsequently withdrew only his appeal concerning the spousal support provision, he argued this withdrawal also terminated the cross-appeal on that issue. The appellate court ruled that the cross-appeal did not lapse because, under the relevant procedural law, a cross-appeal is treated as a full appeal as long as the primary appeal is pending, meaning a partial withdrawal of the main appeal does not cause the cross-appeal regarding the same provision to automatically fail.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

§ 251 Abs. 3 ZPO; Appeal Withdrawal Does Not Terminate Cross-Appeal on Spousal Support: The appellate court ruled that the cross-appeal did not lapse because, under the relevant procedural law, a cross-appeal is treated as a full appeal as long as the primary appeal is pending, meaning a partial withdrawal of the main appeal does not cause the cross-appeal regarding the same provision to automatically fail.

Keywords

AI generated
divorce decree duration of spousal support withdrawal of legal petition opposition to divorce standing to appeal cross-border divorce

Cited Legislation

AI generated
§ 251 Abs. 3 ZPO
The court cited this provision to rule that the cross-appeal does not lapse when the main appeal is only partially withdrawn.
AI generated
OG 1992 27
Recipient's Appeal Leads to Reduced Spousal Support Duration Without Cross-Appeal
22 03 139
Appeal Regarding Spousal Support Termination and Revocation of Right of Residence
02 04 16
Appeal on Child Support Binding Status and Provisional Spousal Contribution Awards
OG 1993 2
Retroactive Spousal Support Limit Post-Divorce Filing Date
11 06 128
Untimely Appeal Not Recharacterized as Cross-Appeal

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
§ 251 Abs. 3 ZPO

The court cited this provision to rule that the cross-appeal does not lapse when the main appeal is only partially withdrawn.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Rechtsprechung Luzern

Instanz: · Obergericht

Abteilung: · II. Kammer

Rechtsgebiet: · Zivilprozessrecht

Entscheiddatum: · 18.03.1997

Fallnummer: · 22 97 12/93

LGVE: · 1997 I Nr. 40

Leitsatz: · § 251 Abs. 3 ZPO. Kein Dahinfallen der Anschlussappellation bei einem Teilrückzug der Appellation.

Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.

Entscheid: · Der Kläger reichte gegen das amtsgerichtliche Scheidungsurteil Appellation ein und beantragte unter anderem die Aufhebung seiner Unterhaltspflicht gegenüber der Beklagten (Ziff. 2 des amtsgerichtlichen Urteilsdispositivs). Die Beklagte erklärte daraufhin Anschlussappellation und beantragte eine abweichende Festsetzung der vorinstanzlich gesprochenen Frauenunterhaltsbeiträge. In der Folge zog der Kläger die Appellationserklärung gegen Dispositiv Ziff. 2 des amtsgerichtlichen Urteils zurück. Dabei vertrat er die Auffassung, dass damit auch die Anschlussappellation der Beklagten in diesem Punkt dahinfalle. Das Obergericht führte dazu aus: Hingegen ist die Frage nach dem allfälligen Eintritt der Teilrechtskraft von Dispositiv Ziff. 2 (Frauenunterhaltsbeitrag) des amtsgerichtlichen Urteils bzw. des Dahinfallens der Anschlussappellation infolge Teilrückzugs der Appellation zu verneinen. Gemäss § 251 Abs. 3 ZPO fällt die Anschlussappellation dahin, wenn die Appellation zurückgezogen oder darauf nicht eingetreten wird. Die Anschlussappellation ist indes als ordentliche Appellation zu behandeln, solange die Hauptappellation hängig ist (Studer/Rüegg/Eiholzer, Der Luzerner Zivilprozess, N 3 zu § 251 ZPO).