December 2025 – Rejection of an unreasonable maintenance claim against our client at the stage of provisional order – Reduction, by way of the issued Order, of the father’s monthly child-support obligation to one half of the amount stipulated in the parents’ private agreement

The Order of 10.11.2025, issued by the President of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens, adjudicating upon the opposing party’s (the mother’s) application for provisional relief against our client, determined that our client shall pay the amount of €600.00 per month as maintenance for his nine-year-old minor daughter.

In the context of the parties’ consensual divorce proceedings, the parents had executed a written agreement governing matters of parental custody and child maintenance, whereby the father’s obligation to pay the disproportionate amount of €1,200.00 per month for the minor child’s maintenance had been stipulated.

Upon the expiration of the agreement, our client voluntarily continued to contribute the amount of €600.00 per month toward the minor child’s monthly expenses. Subsequently, the opposing party filed an application for interim measures against him, accompanied by a request for a provisional order, seeking that he be ordered to pay, for the benefit of the minor child, an amount exceeding €1,600.00 per month. The Judge of the Athens Court of First Instance, having established prima facie evidence supporting the substantive merits of our allegations concerning the child’s actual monthly needs—amounting to a figure significantly below that asserted by the opposing party—as well as evidence regarding the opposing party’s financial capacity to contribute to the child’s expenses, given her substantial income, and having upheld our plea concerning her statutory duty to contribute to such expenses, ruled that the father shall contribute to the minor’s monthly needs by paying €600.00 per month. This corresponds to the amount he had voluntarily paid following the expiration of the written parental agreement and constitutes half of the amount stipulated therein. It is noted that in the aforementioned written agreement—signed by our client under conditions of psychological pressure—the child’s monthly expenses had been artificially inflated, and no contribution by the mother to those expenses had been provided.