[Autom. eng. transl.] The article aims to reflect on the rights and duties of so-called de facto couples. Moved by the objective of formulating a critical assessment relating to government bill no. 1339, presented in the Senate on 20 February 2007, in particular on the originality or compromise of the de iure condendo model, the author starts the reflection by examining the constitutional discipline of the family as per art. 29 Const. By referring to the salient passages of the debate in AC, the article reconstructs the main features of the family constitutional model and reviews the different readings that the institution's doctrine and jurisprudence have given. Thus arguing in favor of the exclusivity of the constitutional model in the sense of a reserve to that family model, founded on marriage, of the privileges and benefits (but also of the responsibilities) that the Constitution itself assigns it, the author specifies that this exclusivity does not at all preclude a constitutional relevance of situations of coexistence more uxorio, which can derive their guarantees from the fundamental principles contained in articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution. Thus set, the question of the protection of the aforementioned factual situations qualifies as the protection of human rights, without giving rise to any conflict with the institution of the constitutional family, precisely because of the diversity of the two situations. It follows that the ordinary legislator, to whom an extension / equalization of the family founded on marriage to cohabitation more uxorio is precluded, can however seek protection tools that recognize the aforementioned cohabitation as social training pursuant to art. 2 of the Constitution and meet the protection needs that this factual situation can also generate. Noting that the protections legitimately granted by the system must always address factual situations, the author specifies that these situations must be able to be identified not so much by means of the will of the interested parties as by detecting that de facto conditions have been fulfilled deserving of protection. In this it recognizes a shareable character of the government bill, of which it examines the inspiring principles, with a useful look at foreign experiences in order to highlight their relative originality. Finally, the author wonders about the possible alternatives to the discipline proposed in the bill, noting how the de iure condendo model, original in the European panorama, can ultimately positively respond to the needs, on the one hand, of defending the institution of the family founded on marriage and thus defined by the constitutional charter and, on the other, protection of de facto situations within which the needs and responsibilities of persons deserving of a legally qualified guarantee arise.
|Translated title of the contribution||[Autom. eng. transl.] The bill on the rights and duties of permanently cohabiting people: original model or compromise scamotage|
|Number of pages||18|
|Publication status||Published - 2007|
- Convivenza more uxorio