Apartant-se matisadament de la doctrina jurisprudencial anterior, si bé sense admetre aquesta desviació en l’argumentació, la STSJC de 10.9.2010 determina que el control judicial sobre el conveni regulador de la ruptura matrimonial sotmès a homologació no es restringeix als acords relatius a fills menors o que els puguin perjudicar, sinó que s’estén a tots els acords sotmesos a aprovació per tal de corroborar-ne la legalitat. La decisió es basa, sobretot, en l’aplicació de l’art. 11.2 de la LOPJ i, en definitiva, condueix a establir que el jutjador d’instància no va incórrer en extralimitació pel que fa a la seva tasca fiscalitzadora del conveni. No obstant, finalment el Tribunal aprecia, a diferència de la sentència recorreguda, que la clàusula que va donar lloc a la desaprovació judicial era, després de la seva reformulació pels cònjuges, conforme a Dret i, per tant, calia homologar el conveni. L’anàlisi de la sentència permet distingir dues vessants del control de continguts del conveni regulador: el control més ampli possible que ha d’incloure, fins i tot, valoracions de conveniència econòmica i que és el que recau únicament sobre els pactes relatius als fills menors o que els puguin afectar, i el control estrictament jurídic relatiu a la resta de pactes i que únicament determina la seva conformitat respecte de l’ordenament indisponible.

—

Judicial review of the substantive content of separation agreements and their effectiveness in front of third parties. Comment on the Judicial Decision of September 10th, 2010 of the Catalan Superior Court of Justice.

Slightly moving away from previous jurisprudence, although not openly accepting any deviation from previous legal reasoning, the decision of September 10th 2010 of the Catalan Supreme Court of Justice established that the judicial review over separation agreements in the context of a marriage dissolution seeking judicial approval is not limited to the review of the content regarding minor children or clauses that could eventually damage them but also to all the agreements subject to judicial approval so that their compliance with applicable law is ensured. This judicial opinion is mostly based on article 11.2 of the LOPJ and hence allows concluding that the first instance judge acted within the scope of his jurisdiction when he reviewed the whole content of the separation agreement presented by the spouses before him. However, the court finally considered that, in contrast with the opinion appealed, the clause in the agreement that was not judicially approved, after its reconsideration by the spouses, complied with the applicable law and, hence, the separation agreement was to be judicially approved. The analysis of the judicial opinion allows distinguishing two different levels of judicial review over separation agreements: a maximum review that would subject to scrutiny the agreement’s content and could even include economic considerations and that would only applicable to clauses regarding minor children or that could affect them; and the limited judicial review regarding the other clauses of the separation agreement that should only be reviewed in order to ensure their compliance with the applicable law to them.