What happened?
The Austrian Supreme Court (OGH) addressed the question under which conditions an adult child living abroad can continue to claim maintenance from a parent residing in Austria, and whether higher living costs abroad justify exceeding the so-called “Playboy limit” (luxury cap).
In the specific case, the son concerned has lived in the United States since the age of three, where he has been studying since 2023. He has no income of his own and has now reached adulthood. The father—residing in Austria—earns a very high income (at least EUR 20,000 net per month) and is also obliged to pay maintenance for another child.
Based on a decision by a Californian court, the father had been required to pay child support until the child reached the age of majority, as well as to settle substantial arrears. After reaching adulthood, the son sought maintenance of EUR 3,000 per month before an Austrian court, arguing that he was not yet self-supporting and needed to complete his studies.
The father objected, arguing that the maintenance claim had already been conclusively settled by the American decision (prohibition of re-litigation / res judicata). He also claimed that the son had sufficient means and that studying in Austria would be reasonable. The court of first instance largely granted the son’s application. The appellate court essentially confirmed this decision and allowed a further appeal, upon which the father brought the case before the OGH.
How did the OGH decide?
The Austrian Supreme Court (OGH) dismissed the father’s appeal for lack of a significant legal question, thereby largely upholding the lower courts’ decisions.
First, the OGH rejected the objection based on res judicata: the Californian decision regulated maintenance only until the child reached the age of majority and made no determination for the period thereafter. A new maintenance claim after reaching adulthood is therefore permissible.
Regarding the assessment of maintenance, the OGH stated that due to the father’s very high income, a higher amount based on the percentage method would in principle be possible; however, the claim is capped by the so-called luxury or “Playboy” limit. In cross-border cases, a “mixed maintenance” approach must be applied, taking into account both the financial circumstances of the obligated parent and the purchasing power and cost of living at the child’s place of residence. The fact that living costs in the United States are around 30% higher justifies exceeding the Playboy limit in order to allow the child an appropriate share in the father’s standard of living.
The additional study-related costs were classified by the OGH as special needs (Sonderbedarf), as they exceed standard maintenance requirements and are justified by the child’s specific life situation (studying abroad). These special needs must be covered in addition to regular maintenance, even if the latter already reaches the luxury cap, since they constitute purpose-specific expenses.
The OGH rejected any offsetting based on a maintenance obligation of the mother, as no such corresponding claim existed. Overall, the Supreme Court confirmed that maintenance of EUR 3,000 per month was appropriate and legally unobjectionable.
(Decision 9 Ob 110/24b of 26 August 2025)
I would be happy to assist you with any questions regarding child maintenance.
