Ending the compensatory allowance paid to your ex: when it stops

The case, in five lines

What is brought

A claim to modify final measures under article 775 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil seeking a declaration that the compensatory allowance has ended on one of the grounds in article 101 of the Código Civil or, in the alternative, its reduction or time limitation for a change in means under article 100, with an application to suspend payment provisionally while the case is decided.

Before which court

The sección de familia del Tribunal de Instancia (the family section of the first-instance court) that ordered the final measures, or its sección civil (civil section) where there is no specialised section, under the rules of article 770 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil, or article 777 if there is agreement. First, an appropriate dispute resolution method must be attempted (article 5 LO 1/2025), unless there is gender or sexual violence between the parties.

Deadline

There is no lapse or limitation period: extinction can be sought while the allowance is in force and the ground persists. What depends on the ground is when it takes effect: for the recipient's remarriage or cohabitation, from the day that fact occurs, according to the Tribunal Supremo (the Supreme Court); for cessation of the original cause or a change in means, only going forward. Whatever you fail to pay in the meantime can be claimed from you for five years (article 1966 CC).

Who can bring it

The former spouse who pays brings the claim against the former spouse who receives it. The payer's death does not in itself end the allowance: the heirs may seek its reduction or removal if the estate cannot meet the debt or it would affect their forced heirship rights (article 101 CC).

Financial risk

If the ground is not proven, the claim is dismissed, the allowance stays intact and costs may be awarded, on top of the up-front cost of the investigator or expert. If you stopped paying before the judgment, you face enforcement with coercive fines, seizure of your salary above the ordinary limits if your ex shows need (articles 776 and 608 LEC), and the offence in article 227 of the Código Penal.

Stopping payment on your own is the fastest way to lose

The instinct is usually the same: if article 101 of the Código Civil says the right to the allowance ends when the recipient remarries or lives maritally with another person, you can simply stop paying. That is not how it works. The judgment or approved agreement that set the allowance is an enforceable title until another decision says otherwise, and your ex only has to show that you have not paid in order to ask for seizure. The ground for extinction is something to be asserted before the court, not a licence to stop paying.

The consequences pile up fast. Article 776 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil allows coercive fines against anyone who repeatedly fails to meet payment obligations, without prejudice to seizing what is owed, and article 608 allows the court, where a compensatory allowance is being enforced and the creditor asks for it showing financial need, to set the amount that can be seized without keeping to the ordinary limits. And two consecutive or four non consecutive months without paying a court ordered provision in favour of a spouse already amount to the offence in article 227 of the Código Penal, punishable by three months to one year in prison or a fine of six to twenty four months.

There is only one situation in which stopping payment carries no risk: where the judgment or the agreement itself set a temporary allowance and the term has expired. Article 97 allows the compensation to take the form of a temporary or indefinite allowance and requires its duration or end point to be fixed, so the first step is to read the title. If it sets a date, the obligation ends on that date without any claim. If it makes the end depend on an event, such as your ex finding work, that event must be proven before the court before you stop paying.

Cohabitation: the same registered address is not needed, a shared life is

Article 101 lists three grounds for extinction: cessation of the cause that gave rise to the allowance, the recipient remarrying, or the recipient living maritally with another person. A new marriage is proven with a certificate from the Registro Civil (the civil registry) and leaves little room for argument. Cohabitation is where most of these cases are won and lost, because the law does not define it and the recipient has every interest in concealing it.

The Tribunal Supremo has interpreted it by substance: a person lives maritally when they maintain a stable couple relationship, with a vocation of permanence and a commitment similar to marriage, which the people around them perceive as such, even if it does not take place continuously under the same roof. Dating, occasional meetings or a relationship without stability are not enough. Nor is it necessary for them to register as a civil partnership or on the municipal roll at the same address: keeping two formal homes does not prevent extinction if their real life is shared.

The underlying reason explains the approach. The allowance compensates for the imbalance the divorce caused one spouse, and when the recipient rebuilds their life with someone with whom they share plans and expenses, it no longer makes sense for the former spouse to keep supporting them. That is why courts look at financial and social indicators: who pays the household bills, whether they travel together, whether they present themselves as a couple to family and friends, whether the third party receives post, has keys or parks at that address every day.

From when it stops being owed: the date of the event decides the money

Here is the point almost nobody explains. The Tribunal Supremo, in a 2018 judgment of its full chamber, held that extinction because the recipient remarries takes effect from the moment that event occurs, regardless of the date on which the claim is filed or judgment is given. The same logic applies to cohabitation, with an added difficulty the Court itself noted: the moment it began has to be proven.

The practical consequence is twofold. What you paid after that date is no longer owed and can be recovered, and instalments falling due after it are not owed either. But everything depends on fixing the date with evidence, and that evidence decays over time: neighbours move, posts are deleted and contracts are renewed in another name. Waiting does not cost you the claim, but it does cost you the ability to prove from when. Nor does it make non payment an option, because until judgment nobody knows which date the court will treat as proven.

The other grounds do not reach back. Where the allowance is reduced for a change in means, or ends because the original cause has ceased, reaching that conclusion requires weighing evidence, and the courts' criterion is that the decision looks forward, with no refund of what was received. In those cases every month you delay filing is a month you pay in full, and the tool for not overpaying during the case is the provisional modification in article 775.3 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil, requested in the claim itself.

When your ex no longer needs it or you can no longer pay it

Cessation of the cause is the route where there is no new partner. The allowance arises from the imbalance the divorce caused one spouse compared with their position during the marriage, measured against the circumstances in article 97: age, health, professional qualifications, prospects of finding work or dedication to the family. If that imbalance has disappeared because your ex now has stable employment, has inherited, or has received assets that were not taken into account when it was set, the allowance has lost its reason to exist.

What does not work is reopening facts the judgment has already weighed. Article 100 allows the allowance to be modified for changes in the means of either spouse that so warrant, and article 775 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil requires that the circumstances taken into account when setting it have substantially changed. If your ex was already working part time when judgment was given, continuing to do so is not a change; moving to a permanent contract with a salary comparable to yours is.

The payer's retirement is the most common reason for a reduction and also the most contested. Ordinary retirement on a pension markedly lower than the salary taken into account is a change in means that the court weighs; voluntary early retirement, unpaid leave or a change of activity that cuts income without economic explanation is read as a self induced drop and does not support a reduction. If the allowance was set as indefinite, turning it into a temporary one also requires a real change of circumstances, not a fresh assessment of the same ones.

Before suing: the agreement, compulsory negotiation and a negotiated exit

If the allowance came from an agreement, it must be read in full. The compensatory allowance is a right the parties can dispose of, and spouses may agree its duration, its grounds for extinction or its replacement. A clause that sets it for a number of years, links it to a specific event, or in reality structures it as a deferred payment for the division of common assets changes the case: in that last situation it may not be governed by article 101 and may not end even if your ex remarries. Article 100 adds that an allowance set in an agreement formalised before the letrado de la Administración de Justicia (the court clerk) or in a public deed may be modified by a new agreement meeting the same requirements.

Moreover, in civil matters the claim is not admitted without a prior attempt at negotiation. Article 5 of Ley Orgánica 1/2025 makes it a condition of admissibility in the special proceedings of book IV of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil, where modification of measures sits, and this matter is not among its exceptions. It is satisfied by mediation, conciliation, a confidential binding offer or direct negotiation between lawyers, provided what is negotiated matches what is later taken to court. It is excluded only where there is gender or sexual violence between the parties, because the law then rules these methods out.

Used well, that negotiation is not a toll but the chance to close the matter. Article 99 of the Código Civil allows the allowance to be replaced at any time by a life annuity, the usufruct of specific assets or the payment of a capital sum, and a buy out offer made with the evidence already gathered tends to carry more weight than any threat. It helps to know what your ex is defending: article 220 of the Ley General de la Seguridad Social requires, as a rule, that a divorced former spouse receive a compensatory allowance in order to be granted a survivor's pension, except for victims of gender violence, which is why they resist losing even a small allowance.

The case: route, provisional suspension and evidence at the hearing

The claim is filed before the Tribunal de Instancia that ordered the final measures, as article 775 requires, and follows the rules of article 770, those of contested divorce. If your ex accepts the extinction, a joint application, or one made with the other's consent and a proposed agreement, follows the route of article 777. The general course of a modification of measures is explained in our guide on changing the custody or maintenance set by the judgment; what matters here is what is specific to the compensatory allowance.

The application that changes daily life most is the one in article 775.3: the claim itself may seek the provisional modification of the final measures, dealt with under article 773. With solid evidence of cohabitation or remarriage, asking for payment to be suspended provisionally while the case is decided is the lawful way to stop paying without exposure to enforcement or to article 227 of the Código Penal. Without that evidence, asking for it only shows the court how weak the case is.

At the hearing the burden of proof is yours: you allege the extinguishing event and you prove it. Your ex's refusal to answer or evasive answers may be weighed against them, and the third party they live with may be called as a witness. If the court declares the extinction, the right does not revive even if the new relationship later ends. If it dismisses the claim, the judgment can be appealed to the Audiencia Provincial (the provincial court of appeal) within twenty days, and if new facts emerge the claim can be brought again later.

How we run the case, step by step

1. 1

   Reading the title and identifying the ground

   We examine the judgment or the agreement: whether the allowance is temporary, whether it has its own extinction clauses, whether it was agreed as a deferred payment and what circumstances were taken into account in setting it. That decides whether a claim is needed, on what ground and from what date.

2. 2

   Gathering evidence before giving notice

   We fix with external evidence the date on which the cohabitation or the change in means began: the historical municipal roll, contracts, certified posts and a report from the investigator the firm works with. All of this before any contact with your ex, because afterwards the evidence disappears.

3. 3

   Keeping up payments and documenting each one

   You keep paying in full by bank transfer with a clear reference. That is what protects you from enforcement and article 227 of the Código Penal, and what allows you to claim back what was paid from the date of the extinguishing event if the court so declares.

4. 4

   Negotiation attempt under article 5 LO 1/2025

   We send your ex a concrete, documented proposal: extinction from a given date, reduction, an end date or a buy out under article 99 of the Código Civil. If accepted, it is formalised and submitted for court approval; if not, the proven attempt is filed with the claim.

5. 5

   Claim with provisional suspension

   We file the claim before the Tribunal de Instancia that ordered the measures, seeking extinction from the date of the event, in the alternative a reduction or a time limit, and provisional suspension of payment under article 775.3 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil.

6. 6

   Hearing, judgment and claiming back what was paid

   Your ex has twenty days to file a defence. At the hearing the parties give evidence and the investigator confirms the report as a witness. After judgment, what was overpaid from the declared date is claimed back and you stop paying with the court's backing.

The law that applies

• Art. 101 CC. The right to the allowance ends when the cause that gave rise to it ceases, when the recipient remarries or when the recipient lives maritally with another person. It does not end merely because the payer dies, but the heirs may seek its reduction or removal if the estate cannot meet the debt or it would affect their forced heirship rights. BOE-A-1889-4763
• Art. 100 CC. Once the allowance and its updating bases are set in the separation or divorce judgment, it may be modified only for changes in the means of either spouse that so warrant. One set in a settlement agreement formalised before the court clerk or in a public deed may be modified by a new agreement subject to the same requirements. BOE-A-1889-4763
• Art. 97 CC. Grants the spouse for whom separation or divorce produces a financial imbalance worsening their previous position in the marriage a compensation as a temporary allowance, an indefinite one or a single payment, set by reference to nine circumstances, and requires the decision or agreement to fix the frequency, updating, duration or end point and guarantees. BOE-A-1889-4763
• Art. 1966 CC. Sets a five year limitation period for actions to enforce the obligation to pay maintenance and any other payments that must be made yearly or at shorter intervals. BOE-A-1889-4763
• Art. 775 LEC. Allows the spouses, in all cases, to ask the court that ordered the final measures to modify them provided the circumstances taken into account when approving or ordering them have substantially changed. The application follows article 770, or article 777 if there is agreement with a proposed settlement, and provisional modification under article 773 may be sought in the claim or the defence. BOE-A-2000-323
• Art. 227 CP. Punishes with three months to one year in prison, or a fine of six to twenty four months, anyone who fails to pay for two consecutive or four non consecutive months any financial provision in favour of their spouse or children set in a court approved agreement or judicial decision in cases of legal separation, divorce or nullity, among others, and provides that reparation of the harm always includes payment of the sums owed. BOE-A-1995-25444
• Art. 5 LO 1/2025. Requires in civil matters, as a condition of admissibility, prior recourse to an appropriate dispute resolution method on the same subject later litigated, in the declaratory proceedings of book II and the special proceedings of book IV of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil, except in the matters it lists. Mediation, conciliation, an independent expert opinion, a confidential binding offer or direct negotiation between the parties or their lawyers all qualify. BOE-A-2025-76
• Art. 220 LGSS. On divorce, grants the survivor's pension to a former spouse who has neither remarried nor formed a registered partnership, provided they receive the compensatory allowance of article 97 of the Código Civil and it ends on the death of the deceased, capped at its amount and with an exception for victims of gender violence. BOE-A-2015-11724

Each article checked against the consolidated text published in the BOE (the Spanish official gazette).

Frequently asked questions