Sharing care time does not by itself resolve where adults will live after the breakup. The home may belong to one, be shared by both, or be rented, and the parents’ economic possibilities may be different.
The Colegio de la Abogacía de Madrid has pointed out this issue following its Family and Inheritance congress, held on 5 and 6 November. Its request is a reform proposal, not a legal amendment already approved.
Owning and having use are different things
Ownership identifies who the property belongs to. The attribution of use determines who may occupy it under the conditions set after the breakup.
That is why knowing only the name that appears on the deed is not enough to anticipate the family solution. It also cannot be stated that shared custody always requires selling the house or alternating in it.
What criteria are assessed
The doctrine collected in a resolution published in the BOE sets out two central elements for these cases: the best-protected interest and the ownership of the home.
The attribution must take into account the specific circumstances and establish a duration. Jurisprudence has handled different time frames and solutions; there is no general rule that always grants one, two or three years.
There is no single answer for all territories
It also matters which civil law is applicable. Certain territories have their own regulation on family relationships and the use of the home.
The Basque law, for example, contains specific criteria for shared custody and for the parent with greater difficulty in accessing another home. Those provisions should not be automatically transferred to any separation anywhere in Spain.
What should be clear in an agreement
Before signing an agreement it is advisable to identify the home, its ownership, who will have the use, for how long, and how expenses will be handled.
It is also necessary to distinguish family use and obligations toward third parties. An agreement between parents should not be interpreted automatically as a modification accepted by the bank or by the landlord.
The ICAM places the problem in the difficulty of maintaining two addresses after a separation. Its claim seeks for the regulations to give a more explicit answer to a custody modality that is increasingly frequent.