The order in which relatives are charged with the maintenance obligation is set out in Art. 129 § 1 k.r.o. The person entitled to maintenance may not voluntarily choose the person from whom he will seek maintenance payments. In the case of a person who has parents, children and siblings, the child will be obliged to bear the maintenance obligation in the first place.
In the event of imposing a maintenance obligation on further relatives, it will always be of a subsidiary nature. In the judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court of April 22, 2022, issued in the case No. II SA / Po 926/21, it was emphasized that „The rule is also that the maintenance obligation of the liable arises only when there is no obligated person in the immediate vicinity. sequence or when that person is unable to fulfill his obligation or when it is impossible to obtain from him the means of subsistence for the time needed by the entitled person or it is associated with excessive difficulties. „
According to the judgment of the Supreme Court of July 16, 1971 in the case No. III CRN 187/71 „If the child’s mother, although capable of manual work, has no permanent job, she often stays in a hospital for the nervous and mentally ill, and works only occasionally, it is difficult to believe that she is able to provide the child with means of subsistence systematically and on time. In that case, according to Art. 132 sentence ost.r.o.p., the entitled person could demand the provision of supplementary means of subsistence from the relatives of the obligated further. „
First of all, a state of deficiency must arise on the part of the person entitled to alimony in order to enable him to pursue his claim – this condition does not cover the child’s claim against the parents. „The maintenance obligation towards a child is not“ divided ”as if into the parent and the native part, and when the father is unable to meet his obligation, it does not mean that his relatives should do it for him. In such a situation, this obligation is transferred primarily to the other parent, and if the other parent is not able to fulfill this obligation in whole or in part, the grandparents of both lines, ie the mother and mother lines, will be obliged in the same order „.
The thesis of the Supreme Court’s judgment of May 14, 1962 (reference number 2 CR 167/62) indicates that „The maintenance obligation of a distant relative exists not only when the closer relative is unable to fulfill this obligation, but may also arise when the closer relative despite such opportunities, he fails to fulfill his obligations. A distant relative who provides for the benefit of the entitled person shall be entitled to recourse to the closer relative to the extent that the latter’s failure to fulfill the maintenance obligation is not the result of an objective impossibility, but the result of failure to fulfill that obligation. „.