Czy sam wpływ środków pieniężnych pochodzących z majątku osobistego małżonka na rachunek bankowy prowadzony dla obojga małżonków, których łączy wspólność majątkowa małżeńska powoduje poszerzenie majątku objętego tą wspólnością? Uwagi na tle postanowienia Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 20 lutego 2020 roku, III CSK 235 19

Abstrakt

In the discussed decision, the Supreme Court took a firm position (which at the same time is not supported by the justification accompanying the decision) that the mere deposit of funds belonging to the personal property of one of the spouses remaining in the matrimonial joint property regime in the bank account maintained for both spouses increases the joint property. The presented position, relevant to the issue of great practical importance, does not merit approval. Contrary, it should be assumed that a claim for payment of cash from the bank account arising from the inflow of cash to the bank account remains an element of the spouse's personal property. It can be argued that this is determined by the very fact that the emergence of the such claim does not constitute the acquisition of an asset within the meaning of Article 31 § 1 sentence 1 of the Family and Guardianship Code. If the above view is rejected, the adopted position is supported primarily by the fact that the claim in question is part of the spouse's personal property due to the application of the principle of subrogation in this property, as well as due the fact that the mere maintenance of a joint bank account for spouses remaining in matrimonial joint property regime does not mean subjecting an indicated claim to the rules of this regime.