The General Assembly of Civil Chambers determined that, in its post-reversal judgment, the local court had added a new element of fault against the wife — namely, "incurring expenses that could be considered luxury while the family was in financial hardship" — that had not appeared in its previous decision, and that the judgment was therefore, in procedural terms, not a genuine resistance judgment but a new judgment. Based on this finding, it was held that the appellate review fell within the jurisdiction of the relevant Specialized Chamber rather than the General Assembly of Civil Chambers.
