Man discovers he is not the father of a child and will be compensated by his ex-wife

The São Paulo Court upheld the conviction of a woman who hid from her ex-partner the possibility that he was not the biological father of a child. The decision recognized that the man was led to assume paternity, both emotionally and financially, and ordered the payment of compensation for moral and material damages. According to the process, the man registered the child convinced that she had been conceived during the relationship with his then partner. For years, he played the role of father, paying expenses, providing assistance and creating an emotional bond with his son. The situation changed when the real biological father sought out the family after noticing physical similarities with the child and suggested a DNA test. The test confirmed that the man who had registered the child did not have a biological link to the child. Court recognized violation of good faith When analyzing the appeal, the 7th Private Law Chamber of the São Paulo Court of Justice concluded that the mother acted in a manner incompatible with the duties of good faith, loyalty and transparency by omitting that there was a concrete possibility of another person being the child's father. The judges highlighted that the decision does not require a mother to be absolutely certain about paternity before a genetic test. However, they understood that hiding the existence of this doubt caused the ex-partner to assume family responsibilities based on incomplete information, causing material and emotional damage. Compensation of R$30 thousand The sentence was maintained at R$30 thousand, being: R$ 20 thousand for moral damages, due to the emotional suffering caused by the discovery of false paternity; R$10,000 for material damages, referring to the financial assistance provided during the period in which he believed he was the child's father. The judges highlighted that, although the amounts intended to support the child cannot be charged to her, this does not prevent the mother from being held responsible when she induces another person to assume responsibilities arising from a paternity whose doubt was known or should have been known by her. Biological father was excluded from sentencing The panel also analyzed the situation of the real biological father, who had been sentenced in the first instance to share the payment of material damages. However, this part of the decision was reformed. The judges understood that there was no proof that he knew of the child's existence or had participated in the omission of true paternity. Therefore, they concluded that his status as a biological father, in itself, would not be sufficient to hold him responsible for the losses suffered by the plaintiff. The decision was unanimous and reinforces the understanding that family relationships must also observe principles such as good faith, honesty and transparency, especially when they involve rights linked to family identity and parental responsibility.