Good faith not invoked after change in marital status

ATA/622/1996Corte di giustizia / Camera amministrativa29 ott 1996Dismissed

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

A divorced student sought to rely on the principle of good faith, arguing that the administration had failed to alert her to the financial consequences of a later change in marital status. The court held that no protected reliance existed because the consultation occurred while she was still married, so the administration had not been required to warn her about the effects of a subsequent divorce. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Massima Omnilex

Art. 15 lit. c LEE; Art. 26 LEE; principle of good faith in student support matters: an applicant cannot derive a protected expectation from administrative information given while a relevant personal status still exists, where the asserted prejudice results only from a later change in civil status. No duty to warn extends to consequences of a future, uncertain change not yet present at the time of consultation.

Testo completo

Descripteurs

INSTRUCTION(ENSEIGNEMENT); AYANT DROIT; ETUDIANT; CONJOINT; REVENU DETERMINANT; IP

Normes

LEE.15 litt.c; LEE.26

Résumé

Une étudiante divorcée ne peut invoquer le principe de la bonne foi lorsque l'administration, consultée alors que la personne était encore mariée, n'a pas attiré son attention sur les conséquences financières d'un changement d'état civil. Une étudiante divorcée ne peut invoquer le principe de la bonne foi lorsque l'administration, consultée alors que la personne était encore mariée, n'a pas attiré son attention sur les conséquences financières d'un changement d'état civil.

Parole chiave

good faithstudent supportcivil statusdeterminant incomerelianceadministrative advice

Estratto da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether the divorced student could rely on good faith after the administration had not warned her about the financial consequences of a change in marital status.

Decisione estratta

No. The student could not invoke good faith because, when consulted, she was still married and the administration did not specifically have to warn her about the consequences of a later change in civil status.

Motivazione estratta

The decisive circumstance was that the administrative advice was given while the person was still married; the lack of warning did not create a protected expectation regarding a later divorce and its financial effects.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.