Ar faktinėje santuokoje gyvenantys asmenys turi visas sutuoktinio teises ir pareigas?
Tomkevičiūtė, Dovilė |
Asmenys, kurie gyvena kartu ir turi tikslą sukurti šeimyninius santykius, įgyja sugyventinių statusą, kuris savo esme atitinka sutuoktinio statusą. Tačiau šie santykiai skiriasi nuo santuokos jų teisinio reguliavimo apimtimi - teisių sugyventiniams suteikiama mažiau. Nors faktinėje santuokoje gyvenančių asmenų pareigos de facto tapačios sutuoktinių pareigoms, bet de jure jos neegzistuoja. Teisė šeimos santykius reglamentuoja tiek, kiek tai būtina apsaugoti viešuosius ir privačius interesus. Skirtingai nei santuokos atveju, asmeniniai neturtiniai sugyventinių santykiai Civiliniu kodeksu nereglamentuojami. Vienas iš šeimos santykių ypatumų yra tai, kad įstatymų reglamentuoti asmeniniai neturtiniai šeimos narių tarpusavio santykiai gali turėti įtakos jų tarpusavio turtiniams santykiams. Kadangi kartu gyvenančių ir vedančių bendrą ūkį asmenų, asmeniniai neturtiniai santykiai priešingai nei sutuoktinių, Civiliniu kodeksu nereglamentuojami, tai nenustatoma, ir kaip jie gali įtakoti jų tarpusavio turtinius santykius. Dėl asmenų, gyvenančių faktinėje santuokoje santykių reglamentavimo stokos, iškyla daug problemų, ypač kuomet asmenys pakankamai ilgai išgyvena kartu. Pavyzdžiui dešimt metų ar ilgiau veda bendrą ūkį, turi bendrą šeimos biudžetą, augina bendrus vaikus ar pan. ir nusprendžia skirtis, ar vienas iš jų miršta. Specialių įstatymų reguliuojamų santykių apimtis sugyventinių atžvilgiu yra kur kas siauresnė nei sutuoktinių. Sugyventiniams įstatymai nustato tik minimalias socialines garantijas, mokestinių lengvatų taip pat suteikiama labai mažai. Šiuo metu nors ir esama nemažai sutuoktinių ir sugyventinių institutų panašumų, kol kas daugelyje sferų jų teisinis statusas skiriasi. Šeimos santykiai teisės normų turi būti sureguliuoti taip, kad nebūtų sudaroma prielaidų diskriminuoti šeimos santykių dalyvių dėl pasirinktos santykių formos. Taip pat turi būti pakankamas ir aiškus santykių teisinis apibrėžtumas. Darbe nagrinėjamas partnerytės ir faktinės santuokos subjektų teisių ir pareigų turinys, nustatomi santuokos ir faktinės santuokos diferencijuoto teisinio reglamentavimo pagrindai. Taip pat nustatomi būdai ir įrodymų visuma de facto santuokai patvirtinti. Lyginamuoju metodu analizuojama Lietuvos ir JAV teismų pozicija sugyventinių bylose. Esminės problemos susijusios su faktinės santuokos subjektų santykiais kyla dėl jų teisinio neapibrėžtumo ir nekonkretumo. Suvienodinti santuokos ir faktinės santuokos institutų teisinį reglamentavimą netikslinga, nes tai neatitiktų pačių šeimos institutų esmės ir apribotų asmenų pasirinkimo laisvę bei autonomiškumą. Bet tikslinga yra apibrėžti registruotą ir neregistruotą partnerystę, asmeninius neturtinius jų santykius bei partnerių ar faktinių sutuoktinių asmeninius turtinius ir asmeninius neturtinius santykius su vaikais.
First of all, we can ask what is family in general. People living in common-law marriage, as well as those who live together but are not married and those who live in a partnership, have a right to call themselves a family. The concept of forms of family listed above, and the regulations concerning rights and obligations of those involved in such relationships make a relevant discussion point nowadays. Many changes have occurred in modern social life, therefore the definition of family institution and legal basis for constructing this definition has changed as well. Numerous people de facto live like families, though they are not married. They have children, are involved in a close relationship, keep the household. Such phenomenon is observed not only in Lithuania but also all over the world. With regard to such situation, both society and public institutions need to accept the changes, initiate and successfully apply legal regulations that would properly protect the rights of currently existing family forms. The very first time the need for a reglamentation of partnership institute was mentioned on 1 July 2001, when Civil Code of Republic of Lithuania came into effect. It replaced previously valid marriage and family code and civil code. The new code regulates partnership without common-law marriage as well as material consequences of such a relationship. This is the starting point for legalizing relationships that are not based on common-law marriage. Currently many people live together without marriage, as cohabitees, therefore a state should ensure both regulations concerning rights and obligations of those who are involved, and legal protection of weaker subject and children that are born in such relationship. Lately, many questioned the definition of family that was accepted by the Constitutional Court. This definition is no longer based on common-law marriage The Ministry of Justice of Republic of Lithuania also proposed to legalize unregistered partnership. They define such a relationship as that when a man and a woman simply live together and this leads to certain legal consequences. In the world, several countries, including USA, have legalized unregistered partnership as a form of relationship. If a couple acts like a family, i.e. share certain rights and obligations typical to family life for a long time, society perceives it as a family, regardless the chosen legal form. Otherwise, it could be called discrimination. Couples who live together but are not married are able to acquire a status of cohabitees whose goal is building family relationship and this status in its purpose equals that of a common law husband or wife. Nevertheless, this kind of relationship is different in the terms how it is perceived by law. Though couples living in a common law marriage and those who have a status of cohabitees have de facto the same obligations, the latter are given less legal rights. The law regarding cohabitees is limited only to basic issues. Individual non-monetary contribution covers the act of marriage, divorce, announcing it invalid, parental testing, choice of spouse's last name, child 's rearing, adoption an others. Differently from the marriage, individual non-financial contribution of cohabitees is not regulated by civil law. In common law marriage non-financial contributions in some aspects impact the financial ones. In case of cohabitees, even though they run their hosehold together, as the law does not regulate the issues concerning their non-financial contribution, it is impossible to evaluate how this contribution may influence their financial contribution issues. A lot of problems may arise from the lack of any legal protection for cohabitees, especially in cases when they live together for a reasonably long time. For example, a cohabiting couple spends ten years together and it decides to split, or one of the partners dies. Law concerning legal rights of cohabitees is much narrower than that regarding common law marriage. Cohabitees are ensured only minimal social guarantees and they are hardly able to be given any tax relief. Though common law marriage and a status of cohabiting couple are similar in many aspects, so far the biggest difference is their legal status. The problem of relationship status' recognition by law should be solved that there would be no discrimination because of the relationship form chosen by a couple. There should be also sufficient and clear definition of every kind of relationship. The paper discusses rights and obligations of couples living both in common law marriage and in cohabiting relationship. As well, it analyzes legal differences in the recognition of these relationship. Further, The methods and set of proofs for de facto marriage are presented. Comparitive analysis is used to overview Lithuanian and American Court system's perception of cohabitees in the cases when they were involved. So the issue is: do individuals living in cohabiting relationship have all the rights and obligations of a spouse? In order to answer this question, the goal of the work is presented and it is to analyze differences and similarities existing between different forms of family, compare those rights and obligations, and inspect whether they are efficiently regulated in Lithuania and if the differences of the analyzed rights and obligations are adequately differentiated in order to enable their legal regulation. The objectives of the paper are the following: 1. To determine the content of the rights and obligations of the individuals in patnership and in a cohabiting relationship. 2. To determine the methods to prove de facto marriage. 3. To determine the basis for differentiated regulation of common-law marriage and a cohabiting relationship. 4. To determine the stance of the court institutions in Lithuania and USA in lawsuits involving cohabitees. Hypothesis is: differences between the rights and obligations of individuals involved in a cohabiting relationship and in a common-law marriage are efficiently differentiated, which allows proper regulation of those forms of relationships. In order to achieve the objectives and the goals of the paper, it is applied analytical research method involving the analysis of legal documents, regulations, and lawsuits. As well, the comparative method was used and it included legal literature, legal norms, and judicial practise.