Former Argentina national team and Newell’s player Éver Banega has been barred from leaving Argentina by a Rosario family court amid an ongoing child support debt dispute. The restriction follows a 15-year legal process and the player’s recent addition to the debtors’ registry.
A family court judge in Rosario has ordered a travel restriction preventing former Argentina international midfielder Éver Banega from leaving the country over unpaid child support obligations, according to the Family Court of Rosario. The measure was issued by Judge María José Campanella as the legal file surrounding the support payments continues to advance.
Fifteen Years of Litigation and the Support Order
The legal proceedings date back to 2011 when the child was five years old, Radio Mitre reported. Initial stages of the conflict involved a disputed paternity claim before the footballer formally recognized his son and periods of shared living followed. Over the course of the 15-year docket, the case moved through multiple hearings and financial reassessments.
Laura Recchia, attorney for the mother, stated that recent final rulings retroactively applied the support amount to the initial filing date of the current payment phase.
For a teenager that is very traumatic. That was the time when he started playing at Newell’s and for a year he did not comply with the quota. So the claim had to be started all over again and a provisional quota was dictated and then a definitive one. Laura Recchia, attorney for the claimant, via Radio Mitre
Recchia noted that the accumulated debt currently stands at approximately 3 mil dollars, with the legal team asserting that the player failed to respect regular payment schedules.
Legal Defense Arguments and Court Rationale
During the proceedings, Banega’s defense requested a reduction in the support payments. Legal representatives argued that the athlete’s financial situation had deteriorated following his departure from Newell’s and pointed to salary debts that the club allegedly owed him during his final two years at the institution.
Judge Campanella rejected the defense’s reduction request, keeping the financial terms intact and ordering both the travel prohibition and Banega’s inclusion in the Registry of Delinquent Debtors. The court emphasized that travel restrictions serve as an enforcement mechanism rather than a penal sanction.
Three or four months ago the final sentence came out and when it was dictated, it was rolled back to the moment when the file was initiated, when the payments started. Not only are we talking about the fact that there is a significant debt that is not being met, but the one that had to pay regularly did not respect it either. Laura Recchia, attorney for the claimant, via Radio Mitre
Proportionality and Enforcement Measures in Family Courts
In explaining the judicial restriction, Judge Campanella outlined the criteria governing coercive measures in family law. The magistrate noted that travel bans are evaluated based on proportionality, the debtor’s economic capacity, and the likelihood that a restriction will compel compliance when alternative measures fail.
While discussing the legal framework for recovering child support, the judge contrasted travel bans with other restrictions—such as driving prohibitions, which can prove counterproductive if a vehicle is an obligor’s sole tool for generating income. For an individual with financial resources and a history of frequent travel for professional or personal reasons, a border restriction is deemed an appropriate tool to secure compliance with unfulfilled family obligations.
Читайте также
